The 200 hour per aircraft goal

[JeffDG]

My understanding was that every FRO was directed to make that inquiry. That was my experience, as well.

So?

How long does that inquiry take?  Why not ask a simple question and get an answer?

How many people have been saved a gear-up landing by running their GUMPS check on final, even though they've done it 3 times already in the pattern?  Hell, I check gear down on fixed to this day...because it's a good habit to get into to avoid bending metal.

So, if you consider it burdensome for you to be asked if you've removed the tow bar, well, I think that makes Eclipse's point about just not wanting to jump through some pretty low-impact hoops.

[Eclipse]

And you think someone who has worked at multiple levels of command never had to take a new member to Mission pilot? Or know how the process works? I like most pilots, but those that exhibit attitude like yours are just...sigh.

In most cases, no, I don't.  Any anecdotal experience that person may have onboarding a new member does not make tehm dialed into the challenges of flying in this organization.  Have they ever flown outside of CAP?  Do they really know what it takes?  Can they compare the two?  Do they really know what's being asked of pilots in CAP?  Do they take on the personal and fiscal responsibility of the pilots?  With very few exceptions, the answer to those questions is likely a resounding "no".   Without that understanding/perspective, which is key to the challenge, how can they speak to the issue?

What it takes?  How about, direct quote "I don't have time for all that paperwork. I just want to jump in my club plane and go."
"What it takes..."   That's funny.

"CAP rules/regulations" is code for "Too lazy to fill out a few forms. I just want to burn gas and touch the sky..."

It is, huh?!  Again, from another non-pilot.

What does being a non-pilot have to do with it?

Quite frankly, everything.   Without being a pilot and going through the process, it's pretty difficult to understand the difference in effort required to fly in this organization vs. others.   CAP has a self-created regulatory problem that impacts our ability to attract and retain pilots.   Attempting to marginalize the issue with silly comments such as they're "too lazy to fill out a few forms" shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the challenge we face.

How about being one of the wing staff responsible for insuring those hours are flown, not the mention someone who authored
and piloted, so to speak, a program that gets pilots in the air in for funded training missions on a nearly real-time basis?

The question was......what regulations make it hard to schedule a training sortie.....and we have yet to get an answer.

60-1, 60-2, 62-2, 66-1, 173-3, 174-1...

Excuses from members who can't be bothered.

Speak of what you understand and know about.  You are literally not only making my argument, but also propagating the problem.

[SunDog]

Hi JeffDG,

You're right, of course; the single question isn't burdensome - I was using it as an example of sillinees, a snapshot or slice, of a preponderance of pointless "good ideas" that are part of the bigger picture.

But clearly, I can't answer a tow-bar question 30 miles from the airport. Not quite the same as a GUMP check on final, but I understand what you're saying.

But that example doesn't stand in a vacuum, it's an itty-bitty, petty example of a klunky process. Someone polled their Wing's pilots - the process finished in the second position on why they don't fly CAP more.  Most pilots aren't stupid, or lazy, or indolent. Many of them prefer that the hoops they jump through have some value.

[Eclipse]

What "process"?

[lordmonar]

"CAP rules/regulations" is code for "Too lazy to fill out a few forms. I just want to burn gas and touch the sky..."

It is, huh?!  Again, from another non-pilot.

What does being a non-pilot have to do with it?

Quite frankly, everything.   Without being a pilot and going through the process, it's pretty difficult to understand the difference in effort required to fly in this organization vs. others.   CAP has a self-created regulatory problem that impacts our ability to attract and retain pilots.   Attempting to marginalize the issue with silly comments such as they're "too lazy to fill out a few forms" shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the challenge we face.

I as a GTL, MO and ES officer schedule flying all the time.  I get training mission numbers, arrange funding, plan missions........fill out the aircraft log, do WIMRS, close out the sorties, call the FRO..........strange......seems I should not be able understand the effort required to fly in this organization because I can't sit in the left seat.

And yes....if someone says "I don't fly anymore because there is regs are too hard to follow"......I put that down to laziness as opposed the ability to understand it.  If you are smart enough to fly a C-182 you are smart enough to schedule and execute a CAP sortie.

[JeffDG]

"CAP rules/regulations" is code for "Too lazy to fill out a few forms. I just want to burn gas and touch the sky..."

It is, huh?!  Again, from another non-pilot.

What does being a non-pilot have to do with it?

Quite frankly, everything.   Without being a pilot and going through the process, it's pretty difficult to understand the difference in effort required to fly in this organization vs. others.   CAP has a self-created regulatory problem that impacts our ability to attract and retain pilots.   Attempting to marginalize the issue with silly comments such as they're "too lazy to fill out a few forms" shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the challenge we face.

I as a GTL, MO and ES officer schedule flying all the time.  I get training mission numbers, arrange funding, plan missions........fill out the aircraft log, do WIMRS, close out the sorties, call the FRO..........strange......seems I should not be able understand the effort required to fly in this organization because I can't sit in the left seat.

And yes....if someone says "I don't fly anymore because there is regs are too hard to follow"......I put that down to laziness as opposed the ability to understand it.  If you are smart enough to fly a C-182 you are smart enough to schedule and execute a CAP sortie.

And if the pilot is worried about a bunch of extra paperwork on a mission, he's doing it wrong.  That's the [darn] Observer's job to handle the mission paperwork.  Pilot's the bus driver.

For a CAP training/actual mission sortie, the pilot needs to do a weather briefing, weight and balance, and an evaluation of hazards to be encountered.  Should be doing those for every flight anyway.  When I sit right-seat, the pilot doesn't touch the CAPF104, and when I'm in the left, I expect my MO to do that for me.

[A.Member]

And you think someone who has worked at multiple levels of command never had to take a new member to Mission pilot? Or know how the process works? I like most pilots, but those that exhibit attitude like yours are just...sigh.

In most cases, no, I don't.  Any anecdotal experience that person may have onboarding a new member does not make tehm dialed into the challenges of flying in this organization.  Have they ever flown outside of CAP?  Do they really know what it takes?  Can they compare the two?  Do they really know what's being asked of pilots in CAP?  Do they take on the personal and fiscal responsibility of the pilots?  With very few exceptions, the answer to those questions is likely a resounding "no".   Without that understanding/perspective, which is key to the challenge, how can they speak to the issue?

What it takes?  How about, direct quote "I don't have time for all that paperwork. I just want to jump in my club plane and go."
"What it takes..."   That's funny.

"CAP rules/regulations" is code for "Too lazy to fill out a few forms. I just want to burn gas and touch the sky..."

It is, huh?!  Again, from another non-pilot.

What does being a non-pilot have to do with it?

Quite frankly, everything.   Without being a pilot and going through the process, it's pretty difficult to understand the difference in effort required to fly in this organization vs. others.   CAP has a self-created regulatory problem that impacts our ability to attract and retain pilots.   Attempting to marginalize the issue with silly comments such as they're "too lazy to fill out a few forms" shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the challenge we face.

How about being one of the wing staff responsible for insuring those hours are flown, not the mention someone who authored
and piloted, so to speak, a program that gets pilots in the air in for funded training missions on a nearly real-time basis?

The question was......what regulations make it hard to schedule a training sortie.....and we have yet to get an answer.

60-1, 60-2, 62-2, 66-1, 173-3, 174-1...

Excuses from members who can't be bothered.

Speak of what you understand and know about.  You are literally not only making my argument, but also propagating the problem.

Yea, I got it.  You've established your lack of credibility on the topic already.  I wasn't looking for additional documentation to that fact.

[Eclipse]

Yea, I got it.  You've established your lack of credibility on the topic already.  I wasn't looking for additional documentation to that fact.

[SunDog]

What "process"?

Hello Eclipse - I meant the totality of of getting MP qualified, staying current, chasing the paper and electrons, genetrating and flying a mission, Just an honest impression that there are more hoops than there needs to be. We've bumped heads before, but this is not a snark, I'm coming at you in all sincerity here. . .

I don't have a big issue with the 104 -  it's the whole big, hairy, slimy slog to get to that point. Systems that don't talk to each other, buggy/bad software, some truly asinine release procedures, duplicated effort, etc.  Making the guess-du-jor where the airplane(s) are located today, policy-by-email ("Don't use THAT mission number, use the OTHER one - don't you know that money is spent! We SENT an email!"). Then tracking down the person who is handling THAT bucket of bucks, as opposed to the other person handling another bucket, and, "Oh, be sure to get your release from Joe for this mission. ". Only Joe isn't current as a FRO because someone or some software didn't recognize or save the last update on eServices for him.  And you're off on another phone/email chase. Pilots know these are common, routine kind of events. Or geez, you can't fly - you missed the bagel-slicer safety meeting. . .

Take the annual "don't taxi into a fixed object"  training mentaility. A lot of good organizations have quarterly safety requirements.  Not saying that fits us for sure, but we could look at it. How about looking  at a streamlined release procedure, because you know that can take five or six phone calls. Then I get the "Call me back when you're about to start engine" Really? WTF? Why? You gonna give me a weather update? I've already talked to you twice in the last four hours! And I've been told a bunch of times the FRO ain't a dispatcher.

Hey, if I don't close the mission because I crashed, generate an auto-email two or three hours after I was supposed to be down. No news is good news. I hesitate to be this specific, because this off the top of my head, and there could certainly be holes in these thoughts. But. . .

To the bigger picture - Why not look at how we do this, because guys are not flying, and the goat-rope is part of the reason. Pilots in at least one Wing have said so. Whether we think their reasons are "good" or not,  the process is bugging them to a meaningful degree.

Look, I'm doing the dance, I'm here, I'm flying. . .I took a long break, decided I'd come back and jump through the hoops as necessary, and so be it. But I don't have to lilke it. And I know  the "as-is" has cost us good pilots.   Wouldn't it be a good use of time/money to examine how we go about this part of the mission?

[SunDog]

Wow. Guess what? Some time just opened up for me - I can go extend my night currency. How do I do it? Hit AircraftClubs.com, one time, and bolt for the club?

Or, start the WMIRS chase, track down an FRO. Wait. . . it's Sepetember - is the clsosest airplane really at the advertised location? Ummm. It was on Saturday, but I've gotten burned before. And it's a 182. $$$$.  I can drive an hour to the 172, but it's at a GOB airport. No fuel after 1600, no landings after 2100, but it keeps an airplane close by for the GOB's. No joy there.

I can call around, make sure the 182 is at home-base, invest an hour or so getting the CAP hoops done. Wait, have to go home and get a uniform - driving my wife's car, and don't have my go bag in there. Looks like 2.5 Hobbs NOT on a CAP aircraft. . .

Truly, I know, this is a bit over the top. But not all that much.

[Eclipse]

Go, and enjoy yourself.

[Critical AOA]

So?

How long does that inquiry take?  Why not ask a simple question and get an answer?

Ok but if every time a pilot makes a mistake, if CAP would have all FROs add a new question to their conversation with all pilots, how long would it be.
Did you disconnect the tow bar?
Did you remove the gust locks?
Did you remove the cowl plugs?
Did you remove the pitot tube cover?
Did you sump the fuel tanks?
Did you check weather?
Did you check your personal exhaust pipe for the presence of your head?

[Eclipse]

30 seconds?  One minute?

I've mentioned in other threads that CAP-USAF was pretty shocked during our SAV that there are no questions regarding ORM during the release.
They intended to "shop it" up and discuss having it added.

I don't see how anything that increases safety situational awareness is a bad thing, especially when you read some of the completely unnecessary 78s that
are filed every year.

Our aircrews aren't just "flying", that's missed  on many of them.  They are flying with a purpose, and one which exceeds and is outside the
parameters of simple "wheels up / wheels down" which is the purpose of the GA flying of most our members.  That means that they have 100 more
details to deal with and remember then someone who is "just" flying their club plane (which leaves plenty to remember).

And just like Homer Simpson who forgot how to drive when he learned home wine making, all those details get muddled together and sometimes
fall out the backside of your head.  Add-in family issues, "my boss is a jerk", and maybe you didn't hit the head before take off, and
you get into trouble.

Sometimes these "reminders", are what is needed to wake people up or trigger a forgotten checklist, etc.

As an FRO, rarely will I release anyone who isn't clearly at the airport and ready to go, and I always run the full list.  I also ask the
pilot to contact me when they land, etc.  This generally gets appreciation that someone knows they are gone and where they
were headed.

CAP needs and values its pilots, however we have no need for pilots who are too busy for basic safety procedures, or who believe they "know better".
Do that on your own time in your plane, then at least ours will be fully operational to come and find you when your tow bar hits the prop.

[SunDog]

Good to go for another 90 days.

SA is good. Useless/silly stuff is not. Would like to see NHQ review the procedures, with an open mind, some imagination, see if streamlining is possible without compromising safety.  I think it may be.  Let's look at what has value in proportion to the cost, keep what's worthwhile, junk the nonsense. Some things may be worthy, but not enough to justify continuing with them.

Honestly, it ain't missed on us - we know it's a diffrent kind of flying. Just like two hours in the clag with no autopilot is diffrent. Also tough aviating, and well outside the CAP usual experience. CAP or Club, If I launch from inside the DC FRZ, it ain't  "wheels up, wheels down".  I'm tightly constrained, horizontally and vertically, lot's of frequency changes and hand-offs, and not much forgiveness for mistakes.

Not a personal critique, but if I gotta call you three times before I start the engine, then I won't be bothering you again. You aren't helping me fly safer or do the mission better, but you are distracting me and wasting my time. And If I can't get a release until I'm at the airport, then I also won't be bothering you again.

[NC Hokie]

And If I can't get a release until I'm at the airport, then I also won't be bothering you again.

I am not a pilot or FRO, but I am really having a hard time understanding this mentality.  What is so hard about having to call for a release when you're actually ready to go flying?  Are you afraid that you'll get to the airport and be denied or be unable to reach a FRO?

[FW]

One of the reasons we have such a FR (and safety process) system is because of our penchant for walking aircraft into hangers or other such fixed structures.  I'm not happy with this any longer, and it is one of many reasons why I no longer fly CAP aircraft.  For me, it was much easier to buy an aircraft and fly; safely and conveniently.  I now belong to three other organizations where I can use my aircraft and skills.  There is paperwork, however it is not constraining.  I am still asked to maintain a certain level of proficiency; it's just that I'm able to accomplish this with more flexability.

Why are we flying CAP aircraft less each year?  I used to fly CAP aircraft about 125 hrs/year....

[Eclipse]

One of the reasons we have such a FR (and safety process) system is because of our penchant for walking aircraft into hangers or other such fixed structures.  I'm not happy with this any longer, and it is one of many reasons why I no longer fly CAP aircraft.  For me, it was much easier to buy an aircraft and fly; safely and conveniently.  I now belong to three other organizations where I can use my aircraft and skills.  There is paperwork, however it is not constraining.  I am still asked to maintain a certain level of proficiency; it's just that I'm able to accomplish this with more flexability.

Why are we flying CAP aircraft less each year?  I used to fly CAP aircraft about 125 hrs/year....

We?   Hard to say.

You bought a plane and joined at least three other organizations.  No harm no foul, but not exactly cricket to ask why "we" are flying less, when you,
by design, made a choice to play elsewhere.

[FW]

Eclipse, that was my point.  Volunteers want to participate, however due to the nature of cost/benefit, "we" do what is most convenient to fill our time and needs.  I'm still active in CAP, however flying in CAP is not a part of it.  The need to fly for a cause is replaced by other organizations.  IMHO, that's what is happening with other CAP pilots; they are finding other ways to satisfy their flying needs.

[Eclipse]

Eclipse, that was my point.  Volunteers want to participate, however due to the nature of cost/benefit, "we" do what is most convenient to fill our time and needs.  I'm still active in CAP, however flying in CAP is not a part of it.  The need to fly for a cause is replaced by other organizations.  IMHO, that's what is happening with other CAP pilots; they are finding other ways to satisfy their flying needs.

Again, fair enough, but if you're flying anyway, what's this nonsense about "cost benefit"?

No one should be maintaining their ticket just for CAP, at least not doing so and then complaining about the "cost", because that's not how the model
is supposed to work, any more then if a GTM buys a HMMV for SARExs and complains about the cost.  The point of CAP is bringing skills you already have
and using them towards a greater purpose then just "having them".  If you >want< to go and become a pilot for CAP, great, but no one is asking you to,
so you can't complain about it.

However, >if< the only flying you do to maintain currency and proficiency at the typical rate of the average low-time CAP pilot is in CAP airplanes,
doing so will not only save you money every year (we've run the numbers here), but once you're an MP, you never need to spend another nickel
on a CAP flight.

That's assuming you can be "bothered" to fill out a few forms, and do an online safety thing once a month, which appears to be "too much" for many of
our esteemed pilots. 

CAP provides access to new, and nearly new, state-of-the-art, highly maintained aircraft for a fraction of the cost of what those sames aircraft would
be to rent or buy, yet many of our pilots would rather sit in the FBO and argue about CMX, mostly because GA is a bunch of old women on the front
porch and "I don't like that Jim guy down at CMX, because I heard he overcharged my buddy for spark plugs, once.  He found the mistake and
refunded the money, but still, don't like him one bit.."

In exchange for that access, and for the opportunity to do more then hamburger runs and pattern rides, CAP expects our pilots to act like adults
and treat their flying time "professionally".  Also wear long pants, a golf shirt with a patch on it, and make sure someone knows you're taking the plane and
where you are going - too much for some people.

Maintaining flight currency in CAP is laughably simple.  Flying for free, once you're qualified is also incredibly simple, but making excuses is a lot
easier, so, there you go. If anything, pilots should be lauding the 200 hour expectation because that means there's actually funding to make those
numbers.

[Alaric]

"CAP rules/regulations" is code for "Too lazy to fill out a few forms. I just want to burn gas and touch the sky..."

It is, huh?!  Again, from another non-pilot.

What does being a non-pilot have to do with it?

Quite frankly, everything.   Without being a pilot and going through the process, it's pretty difficult to understand the difference in effort required to fly in this organization vs. others.   CAP has a self-created regulatory problem that impacts our ability to attract and retain pilots.   Attempting to marginalize the issue with silly comments such as they're "too lazy to fill out a few forms" shows a remarkable lack of understanding of the challenge we face.

I as a GTL, MO and ES officer schedule flying all the time.  I get training mission numbers, arrange funding, plan missions........fill out the aircraft log, do WIMRS, close out the sorties, call the FRO..........strange......seems I should not be able understand the effort required to fly in this organization because I can't sit in the left seat.

And yes....if someone says "I don't fly anymore because there is regs are too hard to follow"......I put that down to laziness as opposed the ability to understand it.  If you are smart enough to fly a C-182 you are smart enough to schedule and execute a CAP sortie.

And if the pilot is worried about a bunch of extra paperwork on a mission, he's doing it wrong.  That's the [darn] Observer's job to handle the mission paperwork.  Pilot's the bus driver.

For a CAP training/actual mission sortie, the pilot needs to do a weather briefing, weight and balance, and an evaluation of hazards to be encountered.  Should be doing those for every flight anyway.  When I sit right-seat, the pilot doesn't touch the CAPF104, and when I'm in the left, I expect my MO to do that for me.

Taxi driver - bus drivers follow established point to point routes, taxi drivers go where they are told