Mission Pilot Designation -- IFR Rated Priority Funded Training?

[Short Field]

Further, its this mentality which has led some wings to have a pilot's club where only a small number of pilots can ever get near an aircraft

:clap:  When we got a new C182 with the G1000 in our Wing, the "elite" pilots (i.e. trainers) were very vocal in their belief that only "professional" pilots should fly the G1000 and the rest of us should just plan on being scanners. 

[airdale]

The reality is that most wings don't have the hard-numbers of pilots, period, to start making a subjective call as to who is more "valuable".

Even with only two employees, any competent manager should be able tell you which one is more valuable and how he/she wants to invest in each.

Further, its this mentality which has led some wings to have a pilot's club where only a small number of pilots can ever get near an aircraft - you start deciding which pilots are most valuable and then by the nature of that decision, those pilots will get more hours and support than the new guys, making it very difficult to ever jump on the ride.

Agreed.  The way that is handled in The Real World is that in addition to evaluating value, you also evaluate potential.  Then part of your investment goes into potential in order to develop value.  Potential is just another kind of value -- sort of "future value."

The fact remains that our primary flight missions are during daytime VFR conditions, followed by night VFR, with the need for IFR coming a far third in most areas, and then usually for aircraft movement in advance of VFR missions when things clear up.  Many wings are barely capable of performing even those types of missions.

An instrument rating may not be the most important criterion in determining value.  Probably "availability for missions" is also an important criterion, as are many other considerations.  (Side note re night VFR: The US is the exception internationally in not requiring an instrument rating or at least an additional endorsement for night flying.  IMHO all night flying is either instrument flight or has a very high potential to be.)

Like everything else in CAP, before we can start fine-tuning who gets priority training, we need to be far exceeding on the basic mission.

I don't know about "far exceeding" but if you don't have enough qualified pilots then obviously that has to be a priority.  That isn't antithetical to the "value" notion, it just recognizes that if you don't have enough qualified pilots then the "value" of even the weakest pilots goes up and merits investment.

[FW]

We can use training funds for whatever purpose CAP-USAF allows us.
We have more than enough funds to go around (last I checked) and, from what I remember, we need to put MORE hours on our aircraft.

If CAP feels a need to train more mission pilots for IFR then, I'm sure we could find a way to do it.  Our aircraft are more than capable for IFR flying and, I will go on a limb and say we have more than enough MPs who would like to "upgrade" and/or stay current. 

[DG]

+1, how about spending that money getting VFR to IFR if the need for IFR is so great?

I think the OP has it backward

CAP's fundamental mission is to take pilots who are qualified and current.

And use CAP funds to get them evaluated in CAP airplanes and trained to fly CAP taskings.

[DG]

As a non-pilot, I see a problem with this idea.

If you keep bumping VFR pilots in favor of IFR pilots, you're going to run out of pilots. Not every pilot in CAP has the time or money to become IFR pilots.

In today's reality, a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating is a liability we can not afford.

Airspace flight restrictions and rules are such that a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating should stay at their home airport.

[DG]

If CAP feels a need to train more mission pilots for IFR then, I'm sure we could find a way to do it.  Our aircraft are more than capable for IFR flying and, I will go on a limb and say we have more than enough MPs who would like to "upgrade" and/or stay current. 

CAP is on top of this issue.

CAPR 60-1 Para. 2-8. Pilot Training.
a. CAP cadets and qualified SAR/DR mission pilots are authorized to use CAP airplanes for flight instruction toward any FAA certificate or rating.

[Eclipse]

As a non-pilot, I see a problem with this idea.

If you keep bumping VFR pilots in favor of IFR pilots, you're going to run out of pilots. Not every pilot in CAP has the time or money to become IFR pilots.

In today's reality, a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating is a liability we can not afford.

Airspace flight restrictions and rules are such that a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating should stay at their home airport.

You're kidding, right?  Where are you flying that IFR such a necessity?
Most of our VFR pilots spend the majority of their time in and around ORD's class B, including a couple of airports where if you miss the approach with a tailwind you're getting intercepted.rports where if you miss the approach with a tailwind you're getting intercepted.

[DG]

As a non-pilot, I see a problem with this idea.

If you keep bumping VFR pilots in favor of IFR pilots, you're going to run out of pilots. Not every pilot in CAP has the time or money to become IFR pilots.

In today's reality, a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating is a liability we can not afford.

Airspace flight restrictions and rules are such that a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating should stay at their home airport.

You're kidding, right?  Where are you flying that IFR such a necessity?
Most of our VFR pilots spend the majority of their time in and around ORD's class B, including a couple of airports where is you miss the approach with a tailwind you're getting intercepted.

Anyone who flies near or through today's flight restrictions airspace and refuses to file an IFR flight plan or be one who is looking to work on their instrument rating is either incompetent over-the-hill, or a fool, and we do not need those pilots flying for CAP.

Not when we have so many IFR pilots or VFR pilots working on IFR, which we do in our wing.  We are not looking to exclude VFR pilots but we encourage and support those mission pilots who want to work on their instrument rating.

To do otherwise is the stuff that gives CAP a bad reputation.  You say you are in ILWG?

By the way, are you even a pilot?

[davidsinn]

As a non-pilot, I see a problem with this idea.

If you keep bumping VFR pilots in favor of IFR pilots, you're going to run out of pilots. Not every pilot in CAP has the time or money to become IFR pilots.

In today's reality, a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating is a liability we can not afford.

Airspace flight restrictions and rules are such that a VFR pilot who has no intention of working on the Instrument rating should stay at their home airport.

You're kidding, right?  Where are you flying that IFR such a necessity?
Most of our VFR pilots spend the majority of their time in and around ORD's class B, including a couple of airports where is you miss the approach with a tailwind you're getting intercepted.

Anyone who flies near or through today's flight restrictions airspace and refuses to file an IFR flight plan or be one who is looking to work on their instrument rating is either incompetent over-the-hill, or a fool, and we do not need those pilots flying for CAP.

Not when we have so many IFR pilots or VFR pilots working on IFR, which we do in our wing.  We are not looking to exclude VFR pilots but we encourage and support those mission pilots who want to work on their instrument rating.

To do otherwise is the stuff that gives CAP a bad reputation.  You say you are in ILWG?

By the way, are you even a pilot?

He lives in Chicago. ORD is O'hare. One of his subordinate units has an aircraft based there.

[heliodoc]

I don't know where that "elite" pilot BS comes from in CAP about the G1000

Those GOB's ought to be _ _ _ _ lucky they are not paying 145 to 165 per hour at the FBO with a C172 w/ G1000

Do know where these clowns come from when some in the current Wing I am in CAN NOT or refuse to fly with others other than their good buddies.

Loosing IFR skills in CAP is also a waste when once you are checked out in another Wing and they say one is competent and then doing ANOTHER 25 hours to get checked out in the current wing

"Elite" pilots??  Especially CFI's in CAP who do not choose to instruct or do not FINISH Form 5's on same day and are current themselves in G1000.......there not elite or EVEN Pro pilots and to insinuate that CAP not cover IFR training especially in a ship that is going 21 st Century on CAP's fanny, is basically bad business if all you do is VFR in this ship. 

NOTHING wrong with currency in both round dial or glass.....its just the clowns who do not want to work with the other G1000 pilots..... Instructors who fall in this category...U know who U are!!

[Eclipse]

He lives in Chicago. ORD is O'hare. One of his subordinate units has an aircraft based there.

So...we have no persec anymore at all?

I'm capable of engaging him directly if warranted, and if I want to tell him where I live (which is not Chicago BTW) I can do that as well.  Everyone here knows who I am.

My being a pilot is irrelevant to this conversation, but I was frankly moving on, because when pilots start exhibiting the "you just don't understand if you're not a pilot" behavior, there's no talking to them.

[aveighter]

Anyone who flies near or through today's flight restrictions airspace and refuses to file an IFR flight plan or be one who is looking to work on their instrument rating is either incompetent over-the-hill, or a fool, and we do not need those pilots flying for CAP.

Well, I am a pilot.  Not a great pilot but enough of a pilot to recognize the above statement as bordering on intellectual gibberish.  I'm not sure what "flight restrictions airspace" is but I will admit it sounds scary and we should stay faaar away.  Unless, of course, we are operating in restricted airspace with the proper notifications and permissions from the relevant agencies which is not uncommon in CAP operations.

Like Bob and his boys, our sq. operates under, around and sometimes in what is arguably the busiest airspace on the planet.  It is fair to say that probably 99% of that mission and training activity is conducted VFR. Works just fine.

Are IFR skills and capabilities important?  Of course they are and I would hope the organization would develop underwritten upgrade training programs.  Maybe get some sort of contractual service agreement in return from the pilot for the training.  Might really help with future mission profiles but regardless, the VFR Mission Pilot will be useful for most of our flying most of the time I think.

[Short Field]

Anyone who flies near or through today's flight restrictions airspace and refuses to file an IFR flight plan or be one who is looking to work on their instrument rating is either incompetent over-the-hill, or a fool, and we do not need those pilots flying for CAP.

So tell us what you really think about VFR pilots in CAP....  Should the VFR pilots expect to see their MP rating pulled if you ever get in charge?

[heliodoc]

Ya DG

What is wrong with VFR only pilots in CAP??  Are you also saying anyone working on their INST is incompetent also??

Do not need those pilots in CAP?  Who put in charge of the flying program?  I can not even ATTEMPT to say that with my 800+ PLUS INST and A&P..... you telling me if I dropped my IFR this year and went with VFR only in CAP......CAP wouldn't need me

WOW, DG...I could not even call some of these folks over the hill.  Besides what over the hill to you??  40?

[DG]

Well, I am a pilot.  Not a great pilot but enough of a pilot to recognize the above statement as bordering on intellectual gibberish.  I'm not sure what "flight restrictions airspace" is but I will admit it sounds scary and we should stay faaar away. 

An FDC NOTAM will be issued to designate a temporary flight restriction (TFR). The NOTAM will begin with the phrase "FLIGHT RESTRICTIONS" followed by the location of the temporary restriction, effective time period, area defined in statute miles, and altitudes affected. The NOTAM will also contain the FAA coordination facility and telephone number, the reason for the restriction, and any other information deemed appropriate. The pilot should check the NOTAMs as part of flight planning.

Some of the purposes for establishing a temporary restriction are:

Protect persons and property in the air or on the surface from an existing or imminent hazard.
Provide a safe environment for the operation of disaster relief aircraft.
Prevent an unsafe congestion of sightseeing aircraft above an incident or event, which may generate a high degree of public interest.
Protect declared national disasters for humanitarian reasons.
Protect the President, Vice President, or other public figures.
Provide a safe environment for military or space agency operations.
Provide homeland security.

[MSgt Van]

{...waiting for IFR wings/medal thread...}

[DG]

{...waiting for IFR wings/medal thread...}

:clap:  The proper uniform is the most important aspect of this whole issue.   :clap:

[DG]

As a non-pilot, I see a problem with this idea.

[DG]

being a pilot is irrelevant

What would the Air Force say?

Does the Air Force have commanding officers of flying units who are not pilots?

Can you be a Wing Commander of an Air Force flying wing if you are not a pilot?

Should we be concerned about commanders who are not pilots?

Apparently, the view in some CAP wings (ILWG?) is that being a pilot is irrelevant.

[Eclipse]

being a pilot is irrelevant

Thanks, I'm glad we agree on this.