New CAP Pilot - qualification question?

[Critical AOA]

No, 182/G1000 is High Performance, it's not a complex.

A R182 (there are a few out there) is complex.

So you are confirming then that there is no 25-landing requirement in a G1000 C182, for an already certificated pilot, who already possesses an high-performance endorsement, correct?

It should be, complete the G1000 training, and take an F5 checkride in the airplane, and that's it... as far as basic qualification goes?

Then we can move on to mission-specific training.

Correct.

100h TT, HP, G1000 course and Form 5...no minimum landings required.

Well, I'd say that at least one successful landing is required.

[Eclipse]

Some things just "are" - CAP is a conservative organization that tends to view things with lots of extra lights and blinkie things as "complex", especially
in that our most basic "airplane" is a steam-gauge 172.

[Al Sayre]

No, 182/G1000 is High Performance, it's not a complex.

A R182 (there are a few out there) is complex.

So you are confirming then that there is no 25-landing requirement in a G1000 C182, for an already certificated pilot, who already possesses an high-performance endorsement, correct?

It should be, complete the G1000 training, and take an F5 checkride in the airplane, and that's it... as far as basic qualification goes?

Then we can move on to mission-specific training.

Correct.

100h TT, HP, G1000 course and Form 5...no minimum landings required.

Confirmed, I just did my G1000 VFR check ride last month.  It really isn't a big deal.  You can see the check ride requirements and download the form on the NHQ website.

[Thrashed]

Actually, there is a minimum number of landings required.
See CAPR 60-1 3-1 e.
Minimum for a form 5 checkride is one hour flight and three landings.

There is no minimum requirement for landings prior to the F5. Although, if you do the G1000 tranisition syllabus, there will be a few landings.

[Thrashed]

I'd say 3/4 of the pilots I've talked to has a very poor opinion of the organization, being outdated, overly bureaucratic, and largely ineffective (being replaced with other options for SAR in some areas).  The standard "image" described is of old and relatively incompetent pilots.
Thanks.

As a CAP instructor and checkpilot, I would count myself in the 3/4 above.

[Eclipse]

I'd say 3/4 of the pilots I've talked to has a very poor opinion of the organization, being outdated, overly bureaucratic, and largely ineffective (being replaced with other options for SAR in some areas).  The standard "image" described is of old and relatively incompetent pilots.
Thanks.

As a CAP instructor and checkpilot, I would count myself in the 3/4 above.

..."old and relatively incompetent"?

[rframe]

Actually, there is a minimum number of landings required.
See CAPR 60-1 3-1 e.
Minimum for a form 5 checkride is one hour flight and three landings.

There is no minimum requirement for landings prior to the F5. Although, if you do the G1000 tranisition syllabus, there will be a few landings.

Yes, I saw that yesterday regarding the F5 flight, sounds like a pretty straight forward check out.

I haven't yet read through the G1000 syllabus as it prompts me for an eServices logon credential which I dont have yet.

Thanks for the extra info.

[BlueLakes1]

For background:

In previous versions of 60-1, there was a 25 landing requirement (5 each short field, soft field, standard, and crosswind) for pilots with less than 100 hours TT and no high performance endorsement prior to CAP. That was removed several years ago, so this isn't a "wives' tale" per se, but it is an obsolete requirement (and one that you'd not have been subject to).

That being said, I'd strongly recommend that you seek advice from someone locally regarding procedural issues. Wings are authorized to issue supplements to the regulation, and may have additional guidance on administrative and financial matters that exist as well. The only way to get the true scoop on how things are done in your backyard is to ask someone there - and if your squadron folks can't help, be sure to push it up the chain.

Welcome aboard!

[a2capt]

So other than in the comments in the log book, it's hard to substantiate those landings, so if you're within a few hours of the 100 hour mark, you just might as well fly some more.

[JeffDG]

So other than in the comments in the log book, it's hard to substantiate those landings, so if you're within a few hours of the 100 hour mark, you just might as well fly some more.

That's what I did...

When I joined I was in the 90s TT wise, so a local instructor and I went and I learned some stuff in the 182...had my HP and Complex already, but the day I stop learning while flying is the day my CAP colleagues will be out searching for me.