California CAP Members Can No Longer Marshal Non-CAP Planes

[Eclipse]

^ 900-5 has been in effect as above for a long time, nothing quoted is new, it just says you have to be a trained FLM/S, we're not security guards, and don't drive other people's planes.

Where did this rumor come from?

I agree that pointing a salad shooter with an over-taxed, cockpit-confused, pilot at a cadet with a couple of orange sticks to protect him isn't the safest thing we do, but I also suspect this is a wives tale, or an overstatement.

[RiverAux]

Don't see anything on the CA Wing web site.  They seem to keep some things updated, but don't seem to use it to distribute much useful news.  No wing supplement to 900-5, which I would think would be necessary if they're going to explicitly prohibit something that is allowed under certain conditions by a national regulation. 

[ßτε]

Just to quash the rumors that it is only a rumor:

email sent wing-wide 9 Mar 2009

To all CAWG members:

It appears I was not clear enough before and need to clarify further...in California, CAWG members, both senior and cadet, shall NOT marshal non-CAP aircraft; e.g. aircraft NOT operated by CAP members.  Member-owned aircraft shall be considered CAP aircraft for the purposes of this directive.

Properly qualified and trained CAP members may marshal CAP aircraft and CAP member-owned aircraft when properly supervised.

As the CAWG/CC, I have conducted an ORM analysis of the potential risks versus benefits for CAP marshaling non-CAP aircraft (aircraft other than corporate or member owned).  Since an increasing number of CAP mishaps have been relate to ground handling, especially in CAWG, I cannot in good conscience allow CAP and CAWG to accept the potential liability for mishaps resulting from the marshaling non-CAP aircraft.

This prohibition is in effect in California only and affects only CAWG operations.  Members participating in National Special Activities (e.g. Blue Beret at Oshkosh) shall operate under the direction of the respective activity commander.

Thanks,

Ken

Col KW Parris, CAP
CAWG/CC

[lordmonar]

Intresting misuse of ORM.

A good use of command decision based on a liabilty issue....but let's all be clear...ORM is related to liabilty but it is not one and the same.

[scooter]

I also have watched CAP pilot ignore the guys trying to keep them safe on the ground. I witnessed on pilot almost run over a cadet marshaler because he wasn't paying attention. The cadet had to run for his life. We had and IC at a SAREX that made some pilots shut down their engines after start for starting without clearance from the marshaler. Thought he did the right thing. Taxied with ground mashalers my whole professional flying career. Love those guys, always watch them and follow instructions. If it doesn't make sense, I stop.  I always thought part of the MP curriculum should cover marshalers and why we use them. Not just what the waving of hands means in the book. It should always be part of SAREX evals. 

[RiverAux]

Personally I'm not a big fan of the flight line qualification and our wing rarely uses them, but I think this is something that is probably better addressed at the national level than the wing level. 

[Always Ready]

^May I ask why you are not a big fan of the FLM qualification? I'm curious

[JayT]

^May I ask why you are not a big fan of the FLM qualification? I'm curious

Many CAP bases have a very small area. There's no need for them in a lot of areas. Many times cadets are sent out undertrained. Many times cadets are sent to FLM because there's nothign else for them to do.

[RiverAux]

Basically, it is not necessary for our missions to operate with FLMs most of the time so the risk vs reward makes it not worth it in my eyes. 

Now, if it was one of those things that we used it all the time and I was sure that both the FLM personnel and the CAP aircrews knew and understood well how to work in that environment, then the marginal AE benefit of putting CAP members out there on the flightline might be worth it even if it still isn't necessary to get the job done. 

Keep in mind that I am a former cadet, but in my experience I just don't trust a 13-year old out in this sort of dangerous area trying to direct people driving dangerous pieces of equipment around.  Taking them out on a ground team is no more dangerous than taking them on a hike, but flightline is a different story, especially if it is a mission base with so many darn planes on it that having a flightline crew might actually make some sense. 

[Eclipse]

Keep in mind that I am a former cadet, but in my experience I just don't trust a 13-year old out in this sort of dangerous area trying to direct people driving dangerous pieces of equipment around.  Taking them out on a ground team is no more dangerous than taking them on a hike, but flightline is a different story, especially if it is a mission base with so many darn planes on it that having a flightline crew might actually make some sense. 

Its not supposed to be just a 13 year old, there's supposed to be at least one Flight Line Supervisor monitoring operations.

[JayT]

Keep in mind that I am a former cadet, but in my experience I just don't trust a 13-year old out in this sort of dangerous area trying to direct people driving dangerous pieces of equipment around.  Taking them out on a ground team is no more dangerous than taking them on a hike, but flightline is a different story, especially if it is a mission base with so many darn planes on it that having a flightline crew might actually make some sense. 

Its not supposed to be just a 13 year old, there's supposed to be at least one Flight Line Supervisor monitoring operations.

He/she can't be everywhere at once, and he/she can't stop some plane driver from ignoring a signal and crashing into someone he didn't even see.

[RiverAux]

I'd feel marginally better about it being done if there was a minimum age requirement of 16. 

[Always Ready]

Keep in mind that I am a former cadet, but in my experience I just don't trust a 13-year old out in this sort of dangerous area trying to direct people driving dangerous pieces of equipment around.  Taking them out on a ground team is no more dangerous than taking them on a hike, but flightline is a different story, especially if it is a mission base with so many darn planes on it that having a flightline crew might actually make some sense. 

Its not supposed to be just a 13 year old, there's supposed to be at least one Flight Line Supervisor monitoring operations.

He/she can't be everywhere at once, and he/she can't stop some plane driver from ignoring a signal and crashing into someone he didn't even see.

If it isn't safe enough for a 12 or 13 year old cadet, then it probably isn't safe enough for anyone else in the situation either. Maturity of age does not mean smarter or safer. Most 12-13 year olds are going to run like no other if they are about to get in trouble or hurt. I know some adults that can't say the same

If a FLM is close enough to get hit or touch an 'active' aircraft (meaning the engine is or could be running, I use the 'if there is someone in the cockpit' rule for this) or if they can do so in any of the possible paths of the aircraft, they are doing their job wrong and should be pulled from the flight line. If a marshaler is walking/running around while marshaling an aircraft or while in the path of active aircraft, they are doing their job wrong and should be pulled from the flight line. If the FLS is doing anything other than supervising the flight line and keeping an eye on every FLM and aircraft (for example if they are too busy parking planes or paperwork), they are doing their job wrong and should be pulled from the flight line.

I've pulled cadets and seniors from the flight line because they were doing something wrong or possibly not safe and I have no problems doing it again. I don't care if it is an AF 4 star general or a cadet airman, I will pull them off my flight line.

P.S. If someone doesn't have the proper training to keep them safe in the specialty (i.e. prerequisites), then they shouldn't be acting in that role. Period the end.

[♠SARKID♠]

This is probably going to get me flamed, but unfortunately in my experience, quite a few GA pilots are not used to having marshalers beyond the line boy at the local FBO.  They don't watch for marshalers, and they either don't know most of the signals beyond stop and come forward or they ignore them completely and taxi to where ever they want, this creates a dangerous situation for the marshalers and others who may be on the flight line.

With you all the way on that one.  CAP pilots who know to follow my commands, I will gladly marshal.  Canadian F-14s who work with marshals all the time, I will gladly marshal.  Joe "What's He Holding Those Orange Sticks For?" Blow, I will not marshal gladly.  That's one bologna slicer I wouldn't enjoy being near.

[Gunner C]

As a pathfinder, I had army pilots that wouldn't even acknowledge me standing there, even after setting up an LZ and making sure that they aren't going to have a rotor strike (easily).  A certain percentage of pilots are going to blow you off.  That's just the way they are (it's their wing tips).  But I've also had a C-130 crew that followed my directions to the letter - they were pros.  Our pilots (once again, a certain percentage) are not - they're just a private pilot with a spiffy golf shirt.

As far as being mature enough, that varies cadet to cadet.  The trainer needs to monitor the maturity and ability of each during their training.  If they're not ready, leave them in a supervised training role.  If they're ready, then use them.  But for heaven's sake, train those blisterhead pilots!

[SaBeR33]

I also have watched CAP pilot ignore the guys trying to keep them safe on the ground. I witnessed on pilot almost run over a cadet marshaler because he wasn't paying attention. The cadet had to run for his life. We had and IC at a SAREX that made some pilots shut down their engines after start for starting without clearance from the marshaler. Thought he did the right thing. Taxied with ground mashalers my whole professional flying career. Love those guys, always watch them and follow instructions. If it doesn't make sense, I stop.  I always thought part of the MP curriculum should cover marshalers and why we use them. Not just what the waving of hands means in the book. It should always be part of SAREX evals. 

I've seen the same thing happen at a disaster relief exercise where the pilot was promptly grounded by the IC. I also saw it happen while I was a crew chief on C-17s where some lame brain pilot decided he didn't have to pay attention to the head marshaller and nearly ran him over. That captain got the butt chewing of his life first by the Sq. Production Superintendent (a MSgt), then the Logistics Group Production Superintendent (a SMSgt), then the Logistics Group CC (a Col), and finally the Ops Group CC (another Col)! It was not a pretty site. Needless to say he was grounded for quite some time due to the lame brain's direct safety violation.

[Flying Pig]

I have very little experience being marshaled as a pilot.  Who is ultimately responsible if you smack your wing tip while someone is marshaling you?  PIC or Marshaler?

[SJFedor]

I have very little experience being marshaled as a pilot.  Who is ultimately responsible if you smack your wing tip while someone is marshaling you?  PIC or Marshaler?

Hmm.... I'm thinking.....

Responsibility and authority of the pilot in command.

(a) The pilot in command of an aircraft is directly responsible for, and is the final authority as to, the operation of that aircraft.

[Flying Pig]

Thats what I thought also.  Kind of an interesting situation to be placed into as PIC.

[a2capt]

Well, with that list of things that CAP can't be used for at an air show ..

That pretty much leaves parking and setting up chairs.

Try to get a bunch of cadets excited about that. As for AE, well, we can direct parking at our own meetings and set the chairs up there, too. So..

Many air shows we did, we had cadets in BDUs walking the rope line, just the presence kept the penetration down to practically nil. If someone did, they just got on the radio and an airport vehicle came right away.

They are also armed with recruiting paperwork and we always got praise from the air show/airport admin for the first class, professional results. The cadets fall in, have a flight leader, etc. The whole thing is well thought out. Much more so than the other youth organizations that also participated in the same fashion. Boy scouts, Young Marines.. who just never had it together at any event I ever saw them at.

Heck, when you have Young Marines taking aim with "air guns" (think Air Guitar) at CAF's B-17 and "shooting it down", talking about how many bags of groceries it could bomb on your mama's house, and over and over, how it could be crashed into various buildings around the airfield .. what does this tell you?

While our cadets faced the crowd and walked their posts. Individually, meeting each other at the points of over lap and then resuming, the others - they all congregate and talk about grocery bombing. ..and no one was watching what they were supposed to be watching. Needless to say..

Yes, this is just one example. But the results were strikingly similar at other events too, in my observation.

Because we were there, they got to climb around the B-17, into the cockpit, the belly and tail gunner positions, etc.. all the places where the public was not permitted.

Sadly, we had to turn down the offer of a ride, of course. Though some members did ride after the air show when their duties ended anyway, from one airport to the next in the area where they were going to be on display.

..and yes, I know that list is not new, but it seems that it's being scrutinized more and more, and long standing units that have served air shows well into the past are suddenly finding themselves unable to participate and provide in ways they used to.

Perhaps it's for another thread, but I find it saddening that an organization that was founded on member provided assets, some of them even strapping on bombs and going after targets - that we have turned into an organization run by lawyers and fear.  Try using a member owned aircraft now. It's like it's the plague, and try getting into another units aircraft, it's like you are penetrating the clique most of the time.