Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 21, 2018, 01:33:47 AM
Home Help Login Register

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

 on: Today at 01:07:15 AM 
Started by stratocaster29 - Last post by Mitchell 1969
Good Lord!   :-\

Stop taking it and understanding it piecemeal!  :-\ :-\

Read it in its entirety!  :-\ :-\ :-\

Interpret it in its entirety!  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

The answer has been given by Eclipse!!!  :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\ :-\

An OPINION has been given by Eclipse.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 on: Today at 12:04:06 AM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by PHall
Yeah, I bet the throttle was a bit more then "cracked".
As was the guy hand propping...

 on: Yesterday at 11:56:52 PM 
Started by OldGuy - Last post by PHall
Willing to bet they never turned the packs back on after engine start.
That's why they have that checklist thingy... ::)

You turn the air conditioning packs off during engine start so you have enough bleed air available to start the engines.
After engine start you turn the packs back on so the aircraft will pressurize.
Of course there's a Cabin Pressure Warning System that goes off usually at 12000 feet cabin altitude.
That's probably what dropped the Passenger Oxygen Masks.

 on: Yesterday at 11:20:42 PM 
Started by OldGuy - Last post by Check Pilot/Tow Pilot
Plenty of reports of First World Pilots doing dumb stuff. I am gratified that I seldomhear or read this from my fellow airline pilots.

 on: Yesterday at 11:10:28 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by SarDragon
Hand-propping has been a no-no in CAP for many years. But maroons still try it.

 on: Yesterday at 09:48:24 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Luis R. Ramos
Thank you for this. Now I will have two things to show at my next Group's Safety Briefing.

Ask them to see this, and analyze the results.

 on: Yesterday at 09:27:03 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Eclipse

(Video can't be embedded, so you have to click through to see it...)

 on: Yesterday at 09:10:27 PM 
Started by beachdoc - Last post by Eclipse
Everything I have seen so far has been very positive, and everyone looks like they are
doing appropriate tasks, etc.

To be fair, there's been a >lot< of recycled releases and media (for example, I saw the same baby
with headphones on from about 5 different angles on various news sites), but whatever, always nice
to see good press and good will, on top of actually doing meaningful work.

 on: Yesterday at 08:52:13 PM 
Started by stratocaster29 - Last post by PHall
I'm not advocating that we start wearing the bags at meetings or even change what seems to be a common interpretation of the regulation. I just think it is interesting that there is almost an anti-aircrew sentiment in an organization that has flying as an integral component of its mission. This is the only service that cares so much about this issue compared to other services including military, law enforcement, medical, etc. Every branch or agency that has rated flyers consider the flight suit their duty uniform whether they are flying that day or not.

CAP doesn't even need the flight suit - the rest of the GA world flies in shorts and t-shirts.
Nomex in a Cessna is a silly affectation, and there is no statistical basis for it to be considered a
factor in reducing GA injuries, because thankfully there aren't enough GA crashes that include both
fire and Nomex.

CAP doesn't have a "duty uniform".  It does have an MBU, which is whites.

CAP doesn't issue uniforms to adults, nor compensate them for the purchase, therefore
they can't have a "duty uniform" (despite the assertion by 39-1 that a CC can set any UOD).

Expecting people to dress properly and leave the tactical onsie at home when it's inappropriate
for the activity isn't "anti-aircrew" it's "pro appearance and common sense".

However if there is an "anti-aircrew bias" look to the behavior of the "zipper-suited sun gods"
who in many cases disregard not only uniform but other CAP protocols and policies, including height and grooming,
not to mention wearing the same bag they bought 20 years ago, including the wrong insignia and coffee stains.

The argument against the flight suit could be made for more than just GA. It's not usually the fire that kills you, it's the sudden impact prior to the fire.

I get it, it's a mentality that some are better than others or think that the rules don't apply for whatever reason. That is not limited just to CAP, trust me. It's just interesting to me that the flight suit is the only one where so many people scream "No! Never to our squadron meetings!" when it's just another uniform hanging in the closet.

I was always politely informed that the reason for the fire bag is so that you can be properly identified after the crash, not to protect you from dying during a crash and the subsequent fire. lol.

But the May Authorize is in regards to those without qualifications.... for those who have them, there are no restrictions.

That said, and as I stated above... don't be that toolbag.

From what I understand I think the dog tags will be all that's identifiable at that point, but it's a good possibility!  8)

I concede that it can be looked at from both perspectives - what we can determine from the verbiage and what could be seen as the intent. The common thread though is always... don't be that toolbag.

That's why many of us "old time" flyers wore a dog tag attached to or boot laces, the boot usually survives.

Of course DNA makes ID an almost sure thing.

 on: Yesterday at 08:51:54 PM 
Started by beachdoc - Last post by beachdoc
Following is the body of an email sent by NC WG PAO I thought it would be of interest:


We have never seen the likes of the media coverage that the NCWG is getting for our Hurricane Florence work! 

Great job everyone and thank you!!











Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.046 seconds with 15 queries.