G1000 transition training: how is your wing doing it?

[mynetdude]

I helped  pay for fuel for our squadron who couldn't afford to put fuel in the pre-G1000 plane for cadet orides...

Why isn't the USAF paying for those o-rides?

They do, but somebody has to pay for it before the USAF will pay back right? Like doing a F108 to get reimbursed for fuel you used to get to and from ICP for an AFAM.  The USAF isn't gonna dangle money in front of you and say "here's the money, go fly!" No, you have to ask for it back and if you read I got reimbursed via the PIC as I was not on the 108.

[davidsinn]

I helped  pay for fuel for our squadron who couldn't afford to put fuel in the pre-G1000 plane for cadet orides...

Why isn't the USAF paying for those o-rides?

The USAF isn't gonna dangle money in front of you and say "here's the money, go fly!"

That's exactly what they did. I was given a budget for Group I and when it came time to gas the birds I just pulled the avcard out of the binder, reminded the FBO of our tax exempt status and that was that. The wing got the reimbursement from the AF. No funds came out of private pockets. The way I understand it my wing was given $X per cadet and they then broke it up by group.

[mynetdude]

I helped  pay for fuel for our squadron who couldn't afford to put fuel in the pre-G1000 plane for cadet orides...

Why isn't the USAF paying for those o-rides?

The USAF isn't gonna dangle money in front of you and say "here's the money, go fly!"

That's exactly what they did. I was given a budget for Group I and when it came time to gas the birds I just pulled the avcard out of the binder, reminded the FBO of our tax exempt status and that was that. The wing got the reimbursement from the AF. No funds came out of private pockets. The way I understand it my wing was given $X per cadet and they then broke it up by group.

the avcard is owned by your wing right? Its still the same concept, somebody has to pay for it NOW and get paid for it LATER.  Your wing had to request the reimbursement, our wing does the same thing but they expect the private members to foot the bill to start off with.

[davidsinn]

I helped  pay for fuel for our squadron who couldn't afford to put fuel in the pre-G1000 plane for cadet orides...

Why isn't the USAF paying for those o-rides?

The USAF isn't gonna dangle money in front of you and say "here's the money, go fly!"

That's exactly what they did. I was given a budget for Group I and when it came time to gas the birds I just pulled the avcard out of the binder, reminded the FBO of our tax exempt status and that was that. The wing got the reimbursement from the AF. No funds came out of private pockets. The way I understand it my wing was given $X per cadet and they then broke it up by group.

the avcard is owned by your wing right? Its still the same concept, somebody has to pay for it NOW and get paid for it LATER.  Your wing had to request the reimbursement, our wing does the same thing but they expect the private members to foot the bill to start off with.

Yes. The nice thing is no individual needs to wait on reimbursement for A-mission flying. Maybe you should send that up the chain for your wing to consider? I think I heard rumors of a fleet card for INWG vans but I'm not sure if that's true or not.

[mynetdude]

I helped  pay for fuel for our squadron who couldn't afford to put fuel in the pre-G1000 plane for cadet orides...

Why isn't the USAF paying for those o-rides?

The USAF isn't gonna dangle money in front of you and say "here's the money, go fly!"

That's exactly what they did. I was given a budget for Group I and when it came time to gas the birds I just pulled the avcard out of the binder, reminded the FBO of our tax exempt status and that was that. The wing got the reimbursement from the AF. No funds came out of private pockets. The way I understand it my wing was given $X per cadet and they then broke it up by group.

the avcard is owned by your wing right? Its still the same concept, somebody has to pay for it NOW and get paid for it LATER.  Your wing had to request the reimbursement, our wing does the same thing but they expect the private members to foot the bill to start off with.

Yes. The nice thing is no individual needs to wait on reimbursement for A-mission flying. Maybe you should send that up the chain for your wing to consider? I think I heard rumors of a fleet card for INWG vans but I'm not sure if that's true or not.

We used to have cards in our vans they belonged to the squadron or wing I don't know and IIRC we had cards in the planes too, not anymore.  Trying to suggest it again is like putting a thorn on a chair and waiting for them to sit on it!

You're absolutely right about that though it would be a lot easier.

[cachambliss]

For the guys commenting that it is a 50 - 70 mile drive to find a G1000 aircraft (or other a/c), I can only say:  If you want something bad enough you will find a way to make it happen.  Following my retirement from the Army, for 12 years I was the Safety Officer and an Instructor Pilot for the Aero Club at Maxwell AFB.  The only problem was that the Aero Club was in Montgomery, Al., and my home, family, job was in Birmingham, only 114 miles each way.  For 12 years this entailed a 1.75 hr drive each way on Saturday and Sunday for my students, and a monthly trip on a Thursday afternoon to conduct the required safety briefing.  For 12 years and I enjoyed every minute of every drive because It's What I Wanted To Do. .  The Maxwell  Aero Club closed shop in 2006, and since January 2006 thru today I am driving 97 miles each way to teach at the Army Flying Activity at Redstone Arsenal.  Yes there are FBO's and rental airplanes 2 miles from my office, and 4 airports with rental aircraft and flight instruction services within 45 miles of my home where I could instruct.  But I choose to stay with the military clubs because It's What I Want to Do.

If you want something, really want something, then you can find a way to make it happen.  Also,
If you want to find an excuse or reason not to do something, then there are plenty available.

[Thrashed]

The drive would be a lot easier if I got paid too. 

[bosshawk]

Thrash: I think that Cliff completely missed the point about the drive distances that you and I both mentioned.  I have driven those 50 miles each way once a week for about seven years and have done it willingly.  Geography dictates that I live 50 miles from the nearest Sq and I have no issue with that: I wasn't complaining, just a statement of fact.  You have a point, if I was being paid to drive long distances, I would do so willingly.  Doing it for a "unpaid professional" position is another matter.

I served for slightly more than 30 years in the Army and I got pretty used to "unusual" requirements and did so without a whimper.

I did make a comment to the effect that I had no intention of driving the 65 or so miles to the Sq in Fresno that is getting a G1000: my reason is that I am not interested in the glass. co

[mynetdude]

I've done a lot of driving my CAP career, I recently started doing more driving including going out of state to get involved in CAP as well.

Is there any way squadrons can make arrangement to alternate with possession of said aircraft so one only has to make the drive once to obtain the a/c and then drive back upon returning the a/c? So say alternate 1 week out of a month or 2 weeks out of every other month or something.

[sparks]

Some wings rotate aircraft so pilots can maintain currency be it a 172, 182 or the G1000. The arrangement is usually authorized through the wing DO or who ever is the "plane guy". Of course some wings and particularly squadrons are aghast at anyone else accessing "their airplane". So, your results will depend on the flexibility of those in charge. Rotating aircraft between squadrons in a group every 30 days can provide an aircraft in places that otherwise wouldn't have one. Of course the squadrons must have pilots who will use the asset and not just park it. Make your proposal through the squadron commander and Group to your wing DO.   

[mynetdude]

Some wings rotate aircraft so pilots can maintain currency be it a 172, 182 or the G1000. The arrangement is usually authorized through the wing DO or who ever is the "plane guy". Of course some wings and particularly squadrons are aghast at anyone else accessing "their airplane". So, your results will depend on the flexibility of those in charge. Rotating aircraft between squadrons in a group every 30 days can provide an aircraft in places that otherwise wouldn't have one. Of course the squadrons must have pilots who will use the asset and not just park it. Make your proposal through the squadron commander and Group to your wing DO.

I don't understand why squadrons get aghast when some other member that is not from their squadron touches the plane.  Its a CORPORATE asset, yes the squadron has the responsibility of hangaring it but if something happens to the aircraft while the approved member is using it the squadron isn't liable at least that is what everybody keeps saying.

Same with CAP Vans, IIRC they are also corporate assets and even though they may be assigned to a particular squadron there isn't anything that says "you can't use our van" granted, just like the airplane coordinate its use via the proper CoC or if you have a working relation with that squadron you can deal directly if allowed.

Our wing does limited rotation of aircraft but for the most part they are kept in "strategic" locations around the state for response capabilities AFAIK.  Of course, any squadron who does not have pilots have no need for an aircraft which makes sense to not rotate to these squadrons.

[simon]

Mynetdude, squadrons are simply protective of their new toys. Let's face it, most of the planes we fly are 30 years old. Even if it was a now round dial plane, squadrons would be protective of them. The fancy avionics make it even more so. It's like a kid with a new toy.

This probably isn't the place for this, but while I'm here, I'll put my 2c in on the G1000. I've been flying a new non CAP G1000 for a while now and personally, I think a new round dial plane is better for CAP. The G1000 planes provide a negligible advantage over a round dial plane when you take into account the average skill level of a CAP pilot and how much time they are willing to get trained in it and keep it up. I stress the latter - keeping it up. The VNAV baffles people. And to be safe IMC, you should understand it THOROUGHLY. I think probably the only people that do are Garmin, Cessna and the CAP check pilots. VFR on the other hand is fine. Any pilot can figure the G1000 out for VFR in one flight. But IFR is a good deal of training. Then there's the head in cockpit thing - It can be deadly - as it was for one crew.

I spent a few hours as safety pilot doing IMC approaches up here in Northern California this morning in the new private G1000 equipped 182. With the avionics, synthetic vision etc., it is an awesome instrument platform. But CAP, at least in the bay area, is short of current mission pilots, especially those signed off for IFR. The G1000 shrinks the pool considerably. A lot of people just aren't taking the time and it is a real draw on the check pilots (That is the real problem - train the trainer type situation). 1 in 3 of the CAWG planes is a G1000 182, so it has split the resource pool for missions. All the pilots need to get on board and become proficient in the new technology. Otherwise, as an organization, we will be ineffective.

The bottom line is that members need to go out of their way big time to learn this thing.

[mynetdude]

I am not a pilot, I have a decent understanding of aviation/navigation/flying from simulator experience which is not anything to compare to real world flying.

As you say many are not IFR rated, it would seem most of our pilots who are not IFR rated are those who fly for pleasure and are not interested in flying IFR and those who are IFR rated are those who have come from the airlines or corporate flying or even from the military aviation.  There does not seem to be a lot of those?

I have no idea what the regulations are for flying an ES air sortie under IMC conditions other than the obvious FAA regulations that require the pilot be IFR rated but it seems to me CAP does not really do much IFR flying (I would be wrong I am sure) because the MS cannot see if the ceiling is 500ft AGL overcast in the search area or how about when the airport is IFR only but there is clear skies in the search area so I don't know why an IFR pilot doesn't take advantage of their rating to get the plane to an area where searching is possible??? ORM says its too risky??? I have been to countless SAREXs where we could not depart due to low ceiling but other air sorties in other places are able to perform in areas where there is good weather.

My point is, what good is the G1000 if an IFR rated pilot doesn't use it to depart IFR??? Yes I am aware there are more rules and paperwork to do if one is going to fly IFR so I guess that is the other reason for not doing so?

What do you mean by synthetic vision? GPWS?

[vento]

^^^
Not sure what you meant by IFR pilots not using their rating. Here in SoCal most CAP pilots depart IFR due to the marine layer that we very often have. 10 miles inland and it's clear skies better than 6 miles visibility.

Some real missions are also done in IFR conditions. Chasing ELT for example. Granted it will not be as accurate as when we can fly lower, but when there is a down pilot waiting for rescue, we gotta do what we gotta do, just take ORM seriously and we should be fine.