Draft 60-1 out for comment

[DG]

Was told SMs can ride in the glider, not free though.

In PA, the powered tows are $18.

And the flight instruction is given at no charge.

A glider flight is exciting and not to be missed.  From the formation flying 200 feet behind the tow plane on a rope.  To the freedom and quiet of the cruise flight, looking for thermals and lift.  To the finesses and precision of the final approach and landing.

A glider flight is exciting and not to be missed.

[RiverAux]

DG, don't blame me for reporting on what the NB did in regards to a CAP uniform with shorts.  In fact, there were several Wing Commanders from southern border states that got up and said that there was absolutely no need for such a thing even in their areas.

And if your crews are too hot in NOMEX, they have every right under the current regs to wear an all-cotton, short sleeve shirt golf shirt uniform.  Although if they're in one of the few places where CAP has decided to require NOMEX, they're going to be out of luck, but blame the appropriate commander for that decision. 

[Mustang]

CAP finally realizing the training from "outside" CAP is finally going to be somewhat recognized? 

It's a first step in the right direction.  Note, however, that it's subject to the discretion of the wing DOV as to what credit for training will be granted, if any.  Moreover, this only applies to the G1000 pilot qual; experienced CFIs with hundreds of hours of G1000 dual-given will still be required to complete the Cessna Instructor FITS syllabus in order to attain instructor "privileges" in G1000-equipped aircraft.   

[heliodoc]

^^^

Sure its the discretion of the Wing DOV...but that can be challenged if the Wing DOV does not place an emphasis OR does hold much in the  way of a CFI.

Understandably the Cessna Instructor FITS syllabus maybe proprietary such as the "vanguard" issues but with all those instructors and all the bragging CAP has done about the G1000, there ought to be some accountability and "CAP performance" standards as to the CFI's that got the free ride at Independence, KS and have NOT produced any sort of training program.  The accountability ought to be the SAME as the FAA CFI certificate or something similar to hold those individuals that did not produce a program and that some of those in the GOB network, who found a way not to produce any sort of program, to start teaching.  So what if they got a CFI?  CAP hold those folks in higher esteem than the other pilots in the organization.

The civilians (FBO's) have had to operate and teach, and yes, for a profit.  CAP, ought to require and hold a higher standard, like they try to preach.  I haven't totally bought that glass of Kool Aid.  For lack of better terms, CAP has a shoestring program for this advanced technology and it shows on the NHQ CAP Stan Eval website.....nothing notable or new.  Nothing.  I bought my own stuff from Cessna for 200.00 dinero and am self teaching myself this thing...'cuz the folks in my current Wing have not taken this seriously enough for those who did attend the factory program.

With the recent NTSB report indicating that glass (currently) is no safer than round dial.......puts CAP in very precarious position of being an authority in this arena without a REAL standardized program and a 60-1 band aid is no cure for this program.   But this is CAP, and CAPTalkers will see this as sour grapes rather than the true need for the above!!!!

[mynetdude]

Was told SMs can ride in the glider, not free though.

In PA, the powered tows are $18.

And the flight instruction is given at no charge.

A glider flight is exciting and not to be missed.  From the formation flying 200 feet behind the tow plane on a rope.  To the freedom and quiet of the cruise flight, looking for thermals and lift.  To the finesses and precision of the final approach and landing.

A glider flight is exciting and not to be missed.

not sure what WAWG charges, but ORWG when they had gliders charged $30, I've never been in a glider.  I take it the ride is fairly quiet?

[a2capt]

It's actually not .. that quiet.

Just not *that* kind of noise.

The nearby glider unit charges a buck for every hundred feet of altitude. Thats their quoting method. Basically, it's about $30/tow.

[mynetdude]

It's actually not .. that quiet.

Just not *that* kind of noise.

The nearby glider unit charges a buck for every hundred feet of altitude. Thats their quoting method. Basically, it's about $30/tow.

seems we keep weaving in and out of topic here

The funds doesn't seem like much but is this a wing levied fee or is it a fee that only goes to the unit for towing?

$30=3,000ft what's the maximum altitude for a glider? I would guess not more than 5,000ft?

[a2capt]

The tow plane .. uses gas.. builds tach time...

http://skyvector.com/?ll=33.790032194,-118.051429194&chart=114&zoom=3

The altitude here is about that, max, OTOH- there are not limits other than in theory, where you can go VFR, and be free of complex airspace. A glider has the right of way over powered aircraft, but not over an airship. But right of way isn't always a smart thing to push ..

So thats the limitation that gliders have to work with, within CAPR 60-1. Seems they didn't change much else in that relation.

[mynetdude]

The tow plane .. uses gas.. builds tach time...

http://skyvector.com/?ll=33.790032194,-118.051429194&chart=114&zoom=3

The altitude here is about that, max, OTOH- there are not limits other than in theory, where you can go VFR, and be free of complex airspace. A glider has the right of way over powered aircraft, but not over an airship. But right of way isn't always a smart thing to push ..

So thats the limitation that gliders have to work with, within CAPR 60-1. Seems they didn't change much else in that relation.

I know the tow plane uses gas/tach time just seems odd different wings/units charge different rates as if its enough to cover the fuel for the departure tow and return of the powered aircraft.

In complex airspace I understand there would be immense restrictions to a glider so perhaps its not a good idea to glide in a restrictive area although it could be done I suppose.

Makes sense for glider right of ways, as far as airship are you referring to such as a dirigible or blimp? Here's the other odd thing totally unrelated but relates to right of ways...

Ultralight aircraft do not have right of ways over powered aircraft on the ground nor in the air AFAIK and I would guess gliders still have the right of way over an ultralight since the ultralight is considered a powered vehicle/aircraft.

[davidsinn]

The tow plane .. uses gas.. builds tach time...

http://skyvector.com/?ll=33.790032194,-118.051429194&chart=114&zoom=3

The altitude here is about that, max, OTOH- there are not limits other than in theory, where you can go VFR, and be free of complex airspace. A glider has the right of way over powered aircraft, but not over an airship. But right of way isn't always a smart thing to push ..

So thats the limitation that gliders have to work with, within CAPR 60-1. Seems they didn't change much else in that relation.

I know the tow plane uses gas/tach time just seems odd different wings/units charge different rates as if its enough to cover the fuel for the departure tow and return of the powered aircraft.

In complex airspace I understand there would be immense restrictions to a glider so perhaps its not a good idea to glide in a restrictive area although it could be done I suppose.

Makes sense for glider right of ways, as far as airship are you referring to such as a dirigible or blimp? Here's the other odd thing totally unrelated but relates to right of ways...

Ultralight aircraft do not have right of ways over powered aircraft on the ground nor in the air AFAIK and I would guess gliders still have the right of way over an ultralight since the ultralight is considered a powered vehicle/aircraft.

Here in INWG we have three tow ships for one glider. At least one 172 and one 182, I'm not sure what the other is. I know they also use a truck and "kite" the glider to altitude which is far cheaper. That might explain the difference.

[mynetdude]

The tow plane .. uses gas.. builds tach time...

http://skyvector.com/?ll=33.790032194,-118.051429194&chart=114&zoom=3

The altitude here is about that, max, OTOH- there are not limits other than in theory, where you can go VFR, and be free of complex airspace. A glider has the right of way over powered aircraft, but not over an airship. But right of way isn't always a smart thing to push ..

So thats the limitation that gliders have to work with, within CAPR 60-1. Seems they didn't change much else in that relation.

I know the tow plane uses gas/tach time just seems odd different wings/units charge different rates as if its enough to cover the fuel for the departure tow and return of the powered aircraft.

In complex airspace I understand there would be immense restrictions to a glider so perhaps its not a good idea to glide in a restrictive area although it could be done I suppose.

Makes sense for glider right of ways, as far as airship are you referring to such as a dirigible or blimp? Here's the other odd thing totally unrelated but relates to right of ways...

Ultralight aircraft do not have right of ways over powered aircraft on the ground nor in the air AFAIK and I would guess gliders still have the right of way over an ultralight since the ultralight is considered a powered vehicle/aircraft.

Here in INWG we have three tow ships for one glider. At least one 172 and one 182, I'm not sure what the other is. I know they also use a truck and "kite" the glider to altitude which is far cheaper. That might explain the difference.

Interesting, didn't know a truck could be used, that makes a lot more sense unless they are giving powered orides at the same time as glider orides assuming that is permitted.

[SarDragon]

Nope. No pax allowed in the tow plane, except tow pilot trainees.

[a2capt]

..and CAWG's glider attire:


1-5.d Added. Special Uniform for Sailplane Operations. Members may wear a CAP distinctive shirt (Squadron shirt, activity shirt, or any approved knit golf shirt) with dark blue or khaki shorts (hemmed) or BDU pants and tennis shoes while participating in sailplane operations.

Heh, o-rides with the tow plane .. after it cuts off the glider, now that would be kinda .. weird.


No, they don't do that. They (used) to take people in the tow plane to show them it from that side of the operation, what the glider does the tow plane, etc.


I also can't recall ever reading, or observing that the only passengers in the two plane would be a tow pilot in training, or similar operations.


I have observed other glider pilots, cadets, seniors, etc- each getting a glider flight and then a tow plane ride before or after. Mostly for demonstration purposes of what the glider does to the tow plane, and if you're receiving glider training, what the tow plane feels when you do "that" in the glider, in which the tow plane is usually communicating with the glider asking them to do certain moves.

[FastAttack]

A glider has the right of way over powered aircraft, but not over an airship.

Incorrect:

Sec. 91.113 - Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, airplane, or rotorcraft;

[mynetdude]

A glider has the right of way over powered aircraft, but not over an airship.

Incorrect:

Sec. 91.113 - Right-of-way rules: Except water operations.

(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, airplane, or rotorcraft;

wonder how an airship is going to give a glider/sailplane the right of way when it moves like molasses.

[SarDragon]

An airship has the ability to gain altitude at will, and you can't stall it.

[a2capt]

(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, airplane, or rotorcraft;

d'oh, I meant "Balloon" which is (1) of 91.113, as you probably saw.  Thought one thing, typed the other.

Airships are powered, balloons are drift.  An airship can get out of the way, and as noted, can't be stalled. Neither can the balloon.

Now, for arguments sake, I certainly can't believe that a glider couldn't maneuver quicker, change course, whatever, than an airship. A balloon, sure. Fire! and it just goes up.  Unless the glider is climbing, this isn't a problem.  But an evasive maneuver could upset the glider and stall/spin it. So.. 

[mynetdude]

(2) A glider has the right-of-way over an airship, airplane, or rotorcraft;

d'oh, I meant "Balloon" which is (1) of 91.113, as you probably saw.  Thought one thing, typed the other.

Airships are powered, balloons are drift.  An airship can get out of the way, and as noted, can't be stalled. Neither can the balloon.

Now, for arguments sake, I certainly can't believe that a glider couldn't maneuver quicker, change course, whatever, than an airship. A balloon, sure. Fire! and it just goes up.  Unless the glider is climbing, this isn't a problem.  But an evasive maneuver could upset the glider and stall/spin it. So..

lol man I keep forgetting that balloons and blimps and such can't stall (they can FALL though! oi don't it ryme?)

Anyway, so it seems uniform requirements vary for riding in the glider looking forward to seeing our cadets and myself go on the glider hopefully.

[sdcapmx]

Ok, I think we have beat up the glider stuff and uniforms.  How about a few other changes to discuss.

1.  Now requires a CAPF 5 check ride with instrument privileges granted be done by a CFII.  This is not an IPC which requires a CFII.  Even a CFI is allowed to give instrument instruction to a student pilot.

2.  Requires a region DOV  to give all wing DOVs a CAPF 5 annually.  Who pays?  Where is it accomplished? 

[heliodoc]

I agree sdcapmx

There are some other very important things like what you mention such as the "CAPF 5" inst privileges... an IPC ought to meet the requirements when given by the CFII in CAP.  But there is alot of questions needing answers such as who pays and more importantly...is this a second change in 6 months?  Is this more knee jerk reaction?  How is all these new "initiatives" in 60-1 going to contribute to the pilot proficiency program?  What is wrong with the current FAA PTS standards?

The 60-1 G1000 program needs a very serious training overhaul....does th SD Wing  have a good syllabi to go by for this ship?

The uniform issues can be meted out, elsewhere in threads....like the uniform threads

More important stuff like...what I heard this weekend so far.....more Wings worried about utilization rates.   Pretty obvious this week...a gallon of 100LL jumped from approx 3.89 to approx 4.15 a gallon and the airframe price for CAP went up a couple of bucks...

The other obvious fact......there IS a number of pilots unemployed. Whether they are airline drivers or not.... some of CAP's pilots come from those trenches as well as some from other professions that have suffered many a layoff.  I am sure there are CAPTalkers that will debate this til the bitter end and say CAP is low price....but its the economy, stupid could be relevant answer

Yep it's a privilege to fly CAP aircraft, but it also a privilege to fly anyone else's aircraft.  CAP can keep adding more and more to the 60-1 plate to the point that an FBO to the tune of 145/ hr STILL looks good and one can still remain current.

How's about that old CAP Pilot Continuation Training program going??  Found an old copy of that at the Sqdn this week and was wondering where allllllll those other volumes were and why is this not on the NHQ Stan Eval website.   I think the whole training program needs a cleaning before CAP needs 34 more drafts to 60-1.  Just loading up "NEW" drafts isn't going to make the program any more effective unless there is some REAL training material come out of NHQ-CAP.