Meter Reading?

[heliodoc]

Is it really a wise use of resources??  Stewardship of taxpayers money?

Networking may just get by...but really meter reading?  There are more practical projects...Next thing you know CAP will start flyin ARCHER and GA8 to near earth orbit saying we are better than any satellite around.  Cheaper than a satellite, maybe.  Surely not the mission

Next thing you CAP ers will be building airplanes in Wichita and Independence, KS thinkin' we can do it cheaper

Maybe even test fly every Cessna, Beech, and Boeing product out there saying we could do it better and cheaper than someone already employed in KS

WOOOW  If this thing is true... CAP thinking this is a wise use of resources?  Leaves alot of room for CAPerTalk dabate...Is it ethical, Is it OPSEC'd properly...was it properly CAP OPSEC'd

Some people REALLY need to get a hold of themselves

[lordmonar]

Okay....let's do an analysis.

Let's say the City of Littletown need to read the meters.  Company X....can do it via truck with 10 employee, for five 8 hour days, once a month. This gives you a base line at about $20/hour for pay, gas, maintenance and all the doo-dads that come with the operation. $ 8000/month

Let's say Company Y can do it via Airplane in a single 8 hour day one per month at about $400/hour for pay, gas, maintenace and the doo-dads. $3200

CAP can charge the going rate for a 182 (around $90/hour).  $720.

From the city's point of view this is an excellant use of tax payers money.  From a CAP stand point....we get 8 hours a month to keep out pilot's proficiant in an easy mission profile (one large grid squar over the city!)...for FREE!

From a USAF's point of view....again they get proficiant pilots....little or no loss of mission (assuming the MOU was written correctly that AFAMs and CAP Training missions come first).

I see this as a possible win-win.

The only loosers are the other companies that were competeing with us.

The squadron CC/councilmen does not get any personal benifit from it (except maybe 8 hours of free flying  ) so there is no conflict of intrest, no personal financial gain.  And once again assuming that he abstained from voting there is no possiblity of any wrong doing.

Again....is this a cool mission?  Nope.   But if it is not taking away from more important missions then I got no problem with it.

I remember a few years ago we had a similar discussion about CAP flying wild life tracking missions.  There were a lot of people who thought that was a waste of time and resouces.

If the government (City, County, State, Federal) is going to pay for a service.....they may as well pay CAP for it!

[davidsinn]

Excellent breakdown although I'm sure you way undershot what the guys in trucks cost 

[JoeTomasone]

Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?

[Eclipse]

Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?

No, and its an incredibly slippery slope.

We (CAP) are not in the business of replacing businesses with federally subsidized free labor.  The fact that these situations
happen to be aviation related, or are even "win-wins" doesn't change that.  This is a sweetheart deal brokered by someone
who likely benefits personally through the free flying.

Considering where I am from, these things are easy to spot.

In cases like these you could understand why the USAF wants their name off the aircraft and vehicles.

Here's a question I would ask as part of the approval process on this.  Is CAP an equal partner in this town's DR and ES response and this is just a small part of CAP's overall involvement, or is this the only time CAP uniforms are seen and the town found a quick way to help balance the budget?

I'd be much more inclined to go along with this if its one part of a larger involvement and CAP is just doing the town a favor in tough times.

[JoeTomasone]

Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?

No, and its an incredibly slippery slope.

We (CAP) are not in the business of replacing businesses with federally subsidized free labor.  The fact that these situations
happen to be aviation related, or are even "win-wins" doesn't change that.  This is a sweetheart deal brokered by someone
who likely benefits personally through the free flying.

Considering where I am from, these things are easy to spot.

In cases like these you could understand why the USAF wants their name off the aircraft and vehicles.

Exactly.   As I read this thread, I keep coming back to:

"On July 1, 1946, President Truman established CAP as a federally chartered benevolent civilian corporation, and Congress passed Public Law 557 on May 26, 1948, which made CAP the auxiliary of the new US Air Force. CAP was charged with three primary missions: Aerospace Education, Cadet Programs and Emergency Services."


..And I don't see meter reading fitting into that.

Let's say there was a crash during "Operation Meter Read".   Do you think that the CAP insurance company would have a solid case if they denied the claim?

If so, it should give one pause.

 

[lordmonar]

Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?

Under the current rules all law enforcment activites must be okayed by the USAF....and they have posse commutades issues.

But beyond that.....no I don't have any issue with any job CAP could be given that is clearly in support of communits, state and nation. 

[Pylon]

Let's say there was a crash during "Operation Meter Read".   Do you think that the CAP insurance company would have a solid case if they denied the claim?

For the sake of argument: no, the rules are set and very clear - corporate missions approved by NHQ are covered; but, in reality, isn't CAP self-insured for corporate liability? 

[lordmonar]

Exactly.   As I read this thread, I keep coming back to:

"On July 1, 1946, President Truman established CAP as a federally chartered benevolent civilian corporation, and Congress passed Public Law 557 on May 26, 1948, which made CAP the auxiliary of the new US Air Force. CAP was charged with three primary missions: Aerospace Education, Cadet Programs and Emergency Services."


..And I don't see meter reading fitting into that.

Let's say there was a crash during "Operation Meter Read".   Do you think that the CAP insurance company would have a solid case if they denied the claim?

If so, it should give one pause.

Well lots of things have changed since 1948.  As for the insurance company......CAP is self insured.....so yes CAP would pay.

Two things I have to say here.....

First....I am not a fan of the meter reading.....but as a Devil Advocate, I see no problem with it....just not something I would take off work to do.

Second....one of the reasons why we have local squadrons is so that they can establish these sort of local ties.  No one is saying everyone has to do Operation Meter Reading......just as no one has to do CD, ES, AE, CP or any other alphabet of our missions.  But if the Littleton Comp Squadron is filling a need for their community...where exactly is the problem with that?

[Eclipse]

Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?

Under the current rules all law enforcment activites must be okayed by the USAF....and they have posse commutades issues.

Assuming I read it right, traffic reports aren't law enforcement - that'd be like Shadow Traffic Service, right?

I'd have no issue at all doing occasional disaster-related traffic evaluation for evacs and people stuck in the snow, etc.  Telling
people their commute times is a different story, but neither is an LE function as I see it.

The customer in either case would be the DOT, state or fed.

[JoeTomasone]

Let's extend the logic....   What if the city contracted CAP to do daily traffic reports?   Is that an appropriate use?  Where do you draw the line?

Under the current rules all law enforcment activites must be okayed by the USAF....and they have posse commutades issues.

Assuming I read it right, traffic reports aren't law enforcement - that'd be like Shadow Traffic Service, right?

I'd have no issue at all doing occasional disaster-related traffic evaluation for evacs and people stuck in the snow, etc.  Telling
people their commute times is a different story, but neither is an LE function as I see it.

The customer in either case would be the DOT, state or fed.

Yep, DOT-contracted Shadow Traffic type service is what I was getting at.    Eventually it has to come to a point where you conclude that "it's not our mission".   I am positing that meter reading may have crossed that line. 

[Al Sayre]

 We "rent"our aircraft to CAP pilots for C17 proficiency at the standard maintenance rate + fuel, for a C-172 in my are that comes out to about $85/ hour vs. the local FBO at $100/hr.  I can take the FBO's plane anywhere I want, it is ~6 miles from the house and the nearest CAP plane is ~ 50 miles from the house.  What do I save by "renting" the CAP plane?  Cheap flying isn't cheap.

So for all those who are against this mission, I have to ask: What type of non-emergency missions should we accept? Understanding that we have to put around 10 non-AFAM hours/month on the aircraft to justify them, keep proficient pilots, and that with the cost of fuel & maintenance, even our "cheap flying" is beyond the pockets of many pilots?  Or do we just park them except for AFAMs & Member proficiency?

[heliodoc]

Sorry Al,

If CAP is "lookin" to put 10 hr non AFAM traffic for justification

Maybe CAP has to reconfigure its mission matrix to keep em flying and that would REQUIRE some WORK from CAP to WORK with PAPA1 AF, now wouldn't it?  CAP has a real weak presence in MANY arenas and the way some CAPer walk and talk around FBO's, some times cast a doubt by the general public..remember the ol "Airport WEatch" program 10 years ago??

I know emergency managers that talk to ME about CAP... its mission, its aircraft availability, etc  I give em the Wing phone numbers.  Some of em never heard or realized CAP was even doinf flood missions,,,sounds like CAP PIO/ PAO problem(s) doesn't it.

All those wildlife surveys CAP talks about...how about more of them?  I sure KNOW CAP is NOT beating down every research college door looking for aerial photo missions and there are many out there.

BUT CAP lookin for work when their are many other PAID pilots in layoff status........if you were one of those pilots and I KNOW plenty of em...10 are in Afghanistan flyin helos and King Airs, you think they'd look at CAP as "viable" option??

MAYBE CAP ought to do a little suffering like the rest of us who are either serving away from our families or laid off...

Meter reading?  How many meter readers are laid off due to some action of CAP "doing a mission cheaper than anyone else."

CAP might do well to IMPROVE all facets of its own flying program first and then worry about how we are going to do other jobs "cheaper."

If someone was paying me 12.00 flight hour ( which I received while flying skydivers) which ALOT of pilots get startin out and CAP come "struttin" its "stuff"  What kind of atmosphere would that create?


What do you and CAPers really think now?  Those pilots getting rich while CAP worries about its "utilization rates?"


I think there are plenty o CAP pilots who are PAID pilots MAY seem to agree with me

[Al Sayre]

Do you honestly believe that the few non-AFAM missions CAP does is causing pilot layoffs?  How much effect on the local economy can 1 aircraft flying maybe 5-10 hours a month on an MOU "C" mission have?   According to the articles most RF meters are used in rural areas where it isn't cost efficient to send out a guy in a truck that can read maybe a dozen meters a day. An aircraft can collect the data on those same meters in a few minutes. This isn't about ego's and atmosphere, if you have some CAP pilots that you have an ego issue with, take it up with them or their commander.  This is about doing something for the community - saving the city money that can be spent on other services.  The benefit for CAP is aircraft utilization.  Of the 550 or so aircraft CAP has I'd guess that less than 10% are doing non-AFAM missions on a real regular basis.  Mostly things like Sundown patrol that generate less than 30 hours a month- 1 or 2 aircraft x 2 hrs x 8 weekend days/month.    Your argument that this is putting someone out of a job doesn't fly either, If the city saves money on this service, they will spend it somewhere else instead.  So maybe they hire an additional Police or Fireman instead of the meter reader because the money is now available in the budget.

[Eclipse]

We "rent"our aircraft to CAP pilots for C17 proficiency at the standard maintenance rate + fuel, for a C-172 in my are that comes out to about $85/ hour vs. the local FBO at $100/hr.  I can take the FBO's plane anywhere I want, it is ~6 miles from the house and the nearest CAP plane is ~ 50 miles from the house.  What do I save by "renting" the CAP plane?  Cheap flying isn't cheap.

Where you live is not necessarily where a given CAP plane is (others who live near a plane would feel opposite).

So for all those who are against this mission, I have to ask: What type of non-emergency missions should we accept? Understanding that we have to put around 10 non-AFAM hours/month on the aircraft to justify them, keep proficient pilots, and that with the cost of fuel & maintenance, even our "cheap flying" is beyond the pockets of many pilots?  Or do we just park them except for AFAMs & Member proficiency?

I'm not sure of your point - there are plenty of ES assets all over the country that sit idle waiting for the call - fire trucks, police cars, mobile command trucks, not to mention all the military hardware that's on 24x7 standby and never used.

Most wings have little trouble putting hours on their aircraft, and many are getting additional because of all the flying they do.    While I agree that this isn't putting too many commercial pilots out of work, along the same plane (pun intended), if you have to justify keeping a
plane by delivering newspapers with it, you don't need it.

[jeders]

Unless these meters are the size of buses, how is that even possible. Definitely has to be a typo, or someone just doesn't know what they're talking about.

A lot of villages have RF-based devices that transmit to vehicles as they drive down the street, this is pretty common, and I would imagine those same devices have an "up" range as well.

Well, I guess I learned something new. Out here in West Texas we still have guys driving around physically reading the meters.

As far as corruption, meh. It's a job that pays us to fly without using Air Force funds, I'm all for it.

[heliodoc]

Whatever.....

I did NOT say CAP was putting anyone out of work

More clearly......there are pilots out of work and to suggest CAP does better than hiring pilots or meter readers...that is what  I did say

Again somebody has to be paying for something and they are still paying the aircraft rate

Maybe we ought to put UDF teams and CAP GT's out there doing the meter reading 

Cheaper than any airplane and maybe all you'd have to feed them is MRE's McyyD's or some other pogey bait

So saying airplanes are cheaper than ground folks going door ...NOW the  argument about aircraft use doesn't hold water, you got "FREE" ground troops doing a paid meter readers job and the cadets could get outside and away from their computers and get their chubby little bodies back in shape...that goes for those fat and fuzzies that CAPers love to yap about

There would be an excellent program to get those SM out there doing their bit to reduce costs to the medical insurance industry...CAP could be helpin that cause,eh?

Glad I  could derail this thread for you CAPers who think we can do anything....yes WE CAN  .... So easy a caveman could do it

[RiverAux]

Exactly.   As I read this thread, I keep coming back to:

"On July 1, 1946, President Truman established CAP as a federally chartered benevolent civilian corporation, and Congress passed Public Law 557 on May 26, 1948, which made CAP the auxiliary of the new US Air Force. CAP was charged with three primary missions: Aerospace Education, Cadet Programs and Emergency Services."

It might help if you looked at what Congress ACTUALLY chartered us to do.  From federal law regarding the purposes of CAP:

.  Encourage and aid citizens of the United States in contributing their efforts, services, and resources in developing aviation and in maintaining air supremacy.
2.  Encourage and develop by example the voluntary contribution of private citizens to the public welfare.
3.  To provide aviation education and training especially to its senior and cadet members.
4.  To encourage and foster civil aviation in local communities.
5.  To provide an organization of private citizens with adequate facilities to assist in meeting local and national emergencies.
6.  To assist the Department of the Air Force in fulfilling its non-combat programs and missions.

Assisting cities in this manner is quite obviously a way private citizens (us) can contribute to the public welfare. 

By the way, why is this in "Tall Tales"?

[Spike]

^ # 6 above seems to be lacking big time these days.  Spoke to an "old timer" and he stated that back in the 1950's his unit flew Air Force personell around, delivered correspondence, ran communications and helped air force recruiting. 

I think we lost a great deal when the AF stopped running daily operations of the CAP. 

[Eclipse]

Assisting cities in this manner is quite obviously a way private citizens (us) can contribute to the public welfare. 

What's next?  Garbage collection?  Building code enforcement?  How about parking enforcement?

No payroll, no benefits, there's literally no end to the ways we can exploit our members to help balance city budgets!