Some things have not changed ... :)

[a2capt]

Editor:     
The February newsletter stated that "Effective 1 March 1970, all personnel must have an emergency services standard or trainee card to participate on missions" and "all aircraft must carry an observer in addition to the pilot."  It is my opinion that these requirements are grossly impractical.

     The requirements to receive an ES card are to pass a "phase" tests and to possess a first aid card.  These tests are difficult to administer, have absolutely nothing to do with the emergency service we are supposed to be rendering, do not improve the quality of our services and are extremely difficult to process for grading...A first aid card is certainly desired but hardly a necessary item for an ES cardholder.

     The emergency services card itself is difficult to obtain, proves nothing, which actually discourages good members to the point where they leave the program...(they) tire of "bucking the system" and flat quit.  This leaves us with the inferior members who stuck it out because they want to "belong."

     ...The observer require further hinders our operation effectiveness.  Using my squadron as an example: out of 87 members only 20 pilots and four observers have the prized ES cards. Nearly all 20 pilots have their own aircraft.  This means that even with the 100% observer turnout 16 pilots remain grounded or must split and fly two pilots in one plane thus grounding eight aircraft per mission...I believe CAP has lost sight of the fact that we are a volunteer organization.  I believe...CAP needs to recruit and keep quality personnel in order to be an effective emergency service...

2/Lt. Patrick G. Quinn
San Fernando Airport Sr. Sq. 35, Group 1.

--------------------------------------------------

From CAWG Bear Facts, APR-MAY 1970. (The URL is titled wrongly)
http://www.scribd.com/doc/74646538/Bear-Facts-Apr-May-1971

[Eclipse]

Wow - seriously.  New guy who doesn't like the rules and needs to "take a stand".

[Luis R. Ramos]

Eclipse-

This is usually the norm.

It is always the new guys the ones that complain and want to change the rules, the operations, the uniforms, on and on and on.

What happened to the adage "join an organization, spend a few months learning the culture, then and only then you can suggest making those changes?"

How long do you think ought be the experience a new member should have before suggesting changes here?

I may be wrong, but I think that new members should actually strive to become ES qualified before suggesting changes. Even if it takes "having to wait to getting the card."

Flyer

[Eclipse]

The culture of "me" coupled with inconsistent recruiting techniques, initial training and expectations.

In his defense, he was likely given the "fly for free" speech.

[Flying Pig]

"Culture of me"?  Ummmmm.....Per the date.....  this letter was written almost 43 years ago.

[Eclipse]

"Culture of me"?  Ummmmm.....Per the date.....  this letter was written almost 43 years ago.

Yes, right around the time the culture of me started.

[Flying Pig]

Fair enough....

[Eclipse]

It would be interesting to know whether Lt Quinn is still a member (or at least how long he stayed in) and how his views might have evolved with more
experience.

[RRLE]

"Culture of me"?  Ummmmm.....Per the date.....  this letter was written almost 43 years ago.

Yes, right around the time the culture of me started.

According to a lot of people you are both wrong. The "Me Generation" allegedly got its start in 1946 with the birth of the first Baby Boomers. But each generation likes to tag the one after it as the one that started it all. It wouldn't even be the Boomers fault. The alleged Greatest Generation raised the Boomers to be that way.

[RiverAux]

A squadron with 20 pilots..... that would be nice. 

[bosshawk]

I seem to remember a friend of mine, who was formerly a member of that Sq, telling me that he went back there in recent months and didn't recognize a single member.  I can promise you that the number of privately owned aircraft is nowhere near 20: probably not that many in all of CAWG.  Just a little over that number of corporate owned aircraft in CAWG now and they are having trouble making the desired 200 hours per year per aircraft.

[cap235629]

A squadron with 20 pilots..... that would be nice.

We have 8

[a2capt]

In the early part of the 2000's, Sq. 150 had the "CAP Flight Line", except that it was little more than a bunch of people hanging out with cheap tiedown in the middle of metropolis, on a thin strip of airport land at LGB that can't fit much other than tiedowns.  There absolutely had to be more than 20 aircraft there.

Back when "our" fleet was mostly made up of member owned aircraft, and I'm glad I joined when there was still some of that flying opportunity remaining. Some of the best flying I remember was doing stuff for CAP.

Yes, I'm one of those. I joined "to fly", but to fly my own aircraft, and share that experience with others as I could, and we did. Until member owned got shut down.

Can't even give O-rides in them anyway. Even non-funded. So when there's no O-Ride money, there's no flights. A few of us had no problem giving un-funded rides back then.

Heck, if we were going to go drill holes in the sky, might as well make it count, right?

[Garibaldi]

A squadron with 20 pilots..... that would be nice.

We have 8

I think we have 9 that I know of. Out of 51 seniors on the books.

[PHall]

A squadron with 20 pilots..... that would be nice.

Squadron 35 is still around. It's a Senior Squadron and all they do is ES, period...

Some of their members will give o-rides but the majority of their members can't be bothered.

[Eclipse]

A squadron with 20 pilots..... that would be nice.

Squadron 35 is still around. It's a Senior Squadron and all they do is ES, period...

Some of their members will give o-rides but the majority of their members can't be bothered.

It should not be an option.

Not that it's going to be a quick transition, but the deities have seen fit to give us a Wing CC who is actually commanding,
including directing units as to what their flight hour expectations are, including O-rides.  don't make your numbers,
you risk losing the resource to a unit who will.

[PHall]

A squadron with 20 pilots..... that would be nice.

Squadron 35 is still around. It's a Senior Squadron and all they do is ES, period...

Some of their members will give o-rides but the majority of their members can't be bothered.

It should not be an option.

Not that it's going to be a quick transition, but the deities have seen fit to give us a Wing CC who is actually commanding,
including directing units as to what their flight hour expectations are, including O-rides.  don't make your numbers,
you risk losing the resource to a unit who will.

Putting 200 hours a year on their airplane is not a problem for these guys, they're usually closer to 400 hours.
And the vast majority of the time is for either ES or CD missions. This makes the Group and Wing Commanders happy...

[SarDragon]

A few semi-random CAWG stats for FY 12:

29 powered A/C assigned, two were sold, with no hours flown during FY12

Of the 27 remaining, another is awaiting sale, with 60 hours flown in the FY

5450.6 hrs / 27 = 201.9 average

1 plane (based at Riverside, don't know unit) flew 325.5 hrs; 12 flew less than 200 but more than 100

Sq 35 (out of Whitemen) flew 292.7, 3rd most; Fresno's plane flew 297.5, 2nd most

[PHall]

A few semi-random CAWG stats for FY 12:

29 powered A/C assigned, two were sold, with no hours flown during FY12

Of the 27 remaining, another is awaiting sale, with 60 hours flown in the FY

5450.6 hrs / 27 = 201.9 average

1 plane (based at Riverside, don't know unit) flew 325.5 hrs; 12 flew less than 200 but more than 100

Sq 35 (out of Whitemen) flew 292.7, 3rd most; Fresno's plane flew 297.5, 2nd most

The Riverside unit is Sq 5.

[ol'fido]

Although this letter seems a little bit whiny, there were significant differences in the program back then. I can only speak to ILWG on this but I suspect these conditions were very common.

-First and foremost, there was the bureaucracy. This was before the internet age. Typically, paperwork took weeks if not months to work its way through the system. For example, I started attending meetings in Sep '77 and didn't get on the rolls until Feb '79 on the second or third attempt. Often, new members would join and take the ES test(s) within the first month and their 101 card would not show up until their membership had been expired for several months if it showed up at all. Mission Coordinators would bring blank 101 cards to missions and sign off on them for SIT-Student In Training. SITs could do just about anything as long as someone else who was qualified was with them. Plus, just about anybody would be stuck in an airplane to be an Mission Observer. There weren't any G1000s, Beckers, or CAP radios not to mention GPS or Nav systems. So the only need for an observer was to be able to look out the window. Good, bad , or otherwise, that is just the way it was.

-Second, most of the aircraft were member owned so there was no need for putting a set number of hours on them. The "corporate" aircraft were used a lot at the flight encampment as tow planes and at missions. There were no CD missions when I first joined. Actually, one of the movers and shakers on getting the CD missions started was Col Roland Weigand who was the Group 19 commander. We used to call him "Colonel B-52" because he would show up at missions flying his green and white twin engine Beech Baron. But to the number of airframes, I recall many missions when we had 10 or more aircraft checked in down here at the mission base and we were running 3 different mission bases throughout the wing during that weekend. So we might have upwards of 40-50 aircraft working a mission.

-Plus, we would run two missions a year in the wing. A SARCAP in the fall and a SARDA in the fall. There would be three missions bases: southern, central, and northern. I don't remember us ever having a shortage of people or planes at one of these. These made a definite time when someone could go to a mission and get credit towards a qual or a renewal. In my opinioin, this worked a lot better  than the current system the wing has.

Now i don't remember the exact procedure to become a Mission Pilot but I know it involved having the 200 hrs. PIC time, taking 2 tests(open book), having that first aid card(Many members in my area worked at or near coal mines or knew coal miners who could teach first aid through MSHA so that usually wasn't a hard requirement around here.) Dave or Paul could probably tell you better. I don't know about check rides either. But it seems it was a lot simpler and much more effective in many cases than what we have today.

Don't criticize until you walk a mile in the other guys low quarters.

[Eclipse]

-Plus, we would run two missions a year in the wing. A SARCAP in the fall and a SARDA in the fall. There would be three missions bases: southern, central, and northern. I don't remember us ever having a shortage of people or planes at one of these. These made a definite time when someone could go to a mission and get credit towards a qual or a renewal. In my opinioin, this worked a lot better  than the current system the wing has.

What "system" would that be?

[ol'fido]

Exactly.

[Eclipse]

Exactly.

I would suggest you contact your Group ESO.

The wing has published a detailed training framework for FY2013 which includes 2 wing-level SARExs,
6 Group level activities, 6 high bird nets, as well as specific mandates for incorporating ES training into unit-level 13-week schedules.

[ol'fido]

Yeah, I saw the e mail. And if half that comes off as planned, I'd be real surprised.

[Eclipse]

The plans will live or die based on whether the unit and groups fulfill their pieces.

If they can't be bothered, nothing will change.

[captalkpilot]

In FY2012 whiteman sq 35 pilots FLEW 618.7 HOURS.  and 63 observer rides.  They use more planes than just the one at the airport.  :clap:

also there is no member by that name in SQ35 

A few semi-random CAWG stats for FY 12:



29 powered A/C assigned, two were sold, with no hours flown during FY12

Of the 27 remaining, another is awaiting sale, with 60 hours flown in the FY

5450.6 hrs / 27 = 201.9 average

1 plane (based at Riverside, don't know unit) flew 325.5 hrs; 12 flew less than 200 but more than 100

Sq 35 (out of Whitemen) flew 292.7, 3rd most; Fresno's plane flew 297.5, 2nd most

[SarDragon]

In FY2012 whiteman sq 35 pilots FLEW 618.7 HOURS.  and 63 observer rides.  They use more planes than just the one at the airport.  :clap:

also there is no member by that name in SQ35 

A few semi-random CAWG stats for FY 12:



29 powered A/C assigned, two were sold, with no hours flown during FY12

Of the 27 remaining, another is awaiting sale, with 60 hours flown in the FY

5450.6 hrs / 27 = 201.9 average

1 plane (based at Riverside, don't know unit) flew 325.5 hrs; 12 flew less than 200 but more than 100

Sq 35 (out of Whitemen) flew 292.7, 3rd most; Fresno's plane flew 297.5, 2nd most

Lighten up, Francis.

No one by what name? I don't see anyone specific mentioned in my post. (I did misspell Whiteman.)

As for the numbers, they came straight out of WMIRS. I used the numbers from the one airplane based there.

[captalkpilot]

the original poster, wimrs can be misleading that way. no worries here my dragon friend. 

In FY2012 whiteman sq 35 pilots FLEW 618.7 HOURS.  and 63 observer rides.  They use more planes than just the one at the airport.  :clap:

also there is no member by that name in SQ35 

A few semi-random CAWG stats for FY 12:



29 powered A/C assigned, two were sold, with no hours flown during FY12

Of the 27 remaining, another is awaiting sale, with 60 hours flown in the FY

5450.6 hrs / 27 = 201.9 average

1 plane (based at Riverside, don't know unit) flew 325.5 hrs; 12 flew less than 200 but more than 100

Sq 35 (out of Whitemen) flew 292.7, 3rd most; Fresno's plane flew 297.5, 2nd most

Lighten up, Francis.

No one by what name? I don't see anyone specific mentioned in my post. (I did misspell Whiteman.)

As for the numbers, they came straight out of WMIRS. I used the numbers from the one airplane based there.

[SarDragon]

also there is no member by that name in SQ35 

2/Lt. Patrick G. Quinn
San Fernando Airport Sr. Sq. 35, Group 1.

--------------------------------------------------

From CAWG Bear Facts, APR-MAY 1970.

I would expect not.

[CavScout]

I believe almost nothing changes. The 'generation' thing is laughable, with the older gen always naming the next something insulting, when they did horrible stuff in their own way.

I like that letter. I believe it could almost be copy & pasted to be sent up the chain. "GES16" I think it's called, the first GT test you need, I remember as being impractical and useless for new GT members, or at least cadets. Now we have ICS100 and 700 almost equally useless to the new GT3 cadet. Two 8 hour courses just to get GT3 or even participate in a field exercise?

As far as the internet age, we still have many PC-illiterate members and it's rough for them. Systems being too confusing is a constant topic among seniors. I'm great with the digital world but that won't help me through something I do once or twice a year.

Being a volunteer organization means it's a constant battle to fill positions where you get a sizeable workload dumped on you.

Just MHO.

[docbiochem33]

Editor:     
The February newsletter stated that "Effective 1 March 1970, all personnel must have an emergency services standard or trainee card to participate on missions" and "all aircraft must carry an observer in addition to the pilot."  It is my opinion that these requirements are grossly impractical.

          The emergency services card itself is difficult to obtain, proves nothing, which actually discourages good members to the point where they leave the program...(they) tire of "bucking the system" and flat quit.  This leaves us with the inferior members who stuck it out because they want to "belong."

     




I don't see some of the problems and I have seen the changes.  The biggest reason for the changes is safety.  I have seen people do dumb things and they got away with it, but eventually it catches up with people. 

All of the tests are a way of reinforcing safety and it is a way to make sure you actually know what you are doing.  If you ever have the joy of working with a team that has no clue as to what they are doing it makes things tough on the few who do.  I can't say how many times I have been out trying to fix things over getting my job done as a GTL. 

The other thing this does it stop some of the old training that used to exist in CAP.  Persons in training would get their certifications by someone putting in requirements not done and then driving around the block with their trainer and they were all of a sudden "qualified."  This hurt the program more than the requirements do now because you had units running around where it was the blank leading the blind.

I also know as a cadet I never once saw the GTM requirements and could not tell you where to find them, but I was a GTM and Radio Operator Trainee for years.   We need the reuirements.

[CavScout]

Your post was included in the quote. I didn't think you actually commented at first.

I agree, requirements are needed, but maybe certain ones should be changed to be practical, or dropped. GES16 is one of them. All the years I was a cadet, I learned from very qualified SM's, we trained to standard, and we were proficient. It varies by squadron. There hasn't been any change to the system that prevents people from getting tasks signed off when they shouldn't be.

How often do the metro squadrons actually get out into the woods? Don't get me wrong, some do. Some also don't, and even some rural squadrons don't.

[Eclipse]

The 116 has nothing to do with being in the woods, it's baseline pre-req information about how CAP ES works.

Now we have ICS100 and 700 almost equally useless to the new GT3 cadet. Two 8 hour courses just to get GT3 or even participate in a field exercise?

ICS100, 700, and 800 are online tests that shouldn't take more then about an hour total.

As far as the internet age, we still have many PC-illiterate members and it's rough for them. Systems being too confusing is a constant topic among seniors. I'm great with the digital world but that won't help me through something I do once or twice a year.

For better or worse, this is the state of society, not just CAP. If you do not have basic computer skills, it is hard to navigate life, let alone CAP, and while it might be a harsh reality, anyone joining as a new member today, who is unable or unwilling to acquire the very basic online skills needed to
be successful in CAP, is not likely to be much of an asset for very long anyway, nor are they likely to be involved in aviation as a pilot (since that pretty much requires a computer these days), nor ground-pounding (because of age).

If they "just want to help", that's great.  They won't need much online, but staying informed will be a challenge.

[Garibaldi]

How often do the metro squadrons actually get out into the woods? Don't get me wrong, some do. Some also don't, and even some rural squadrons don't.

We find a way. Usually. Even if it takes a few hours fighting gridlock and idiots with HUA/rectal-cranial inversion.

[Private Investigator]

In FY2012 whiteman sq 35 pilots FLEW 618.7 HOURS.  and 63 observer rides.  They use more planes than just the one at the airport.  :clap:

also there is no member by that name in SQ35 

Do they have a Corporate 182 and a 206?

[SarDragon]

The plane based at Whiteman is a 182T.

The 206s are at Gillespie, John Wayne (down), Gnoss, Cable, Zamperini, and Castle.