Interesting Year End Stats

[etodd]

[Eclipse]

The red numbers are the ones that should give the leadership pause, especially O-Rides.
When you consider how much most wings hammer getting cadets in the air, it's a wonder
those numbers continue to fall.

The DR is likely an anomaly thanks to Matthew, and while support to ROTC is fine, that's up while
flying our own cadets is way down.  I'd hazard that't due to the continued significant shrinkage
of the cadet population as a whole, plus disengagement.

One thing - if your wing isn't flying, it's not due to lack of money, and at least East of the Mississippi,
there's been plenty of mission work this year, air and ground.

[etodd]

In looking at those stats, is everything at the top 'A' missions since its totaled under it as AFAM?

Are self-pay 'C' proficiency flights part of 'Corporate' shown?

Here is the full pdf file, btw:
https://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/DO04_Aircraft_Ops__StanEval__3_Aug__641678DAAEA2E.pdf

[etodd]

The red numbers are the ones that should give the leadership pause, especially O-Rides.
When you consider how much most wings hammer getting cadets in the air, it's a wonder
those numbers continue to fall.

As CAP buys more and more C-182s .... how will this affect Cadet training? We have Cadets taking primary training in our 172 that would not be possible with a 182. Seems to me CAP should be pushing Cadet training more. With a PPL costing about half what a Part 91 school wants, we could have new Cadets lined up at the door.

One thing - if your wing isn't flying, it's not due to lack of money, and at least East of the Mississippi,
there's been plenty of mission work this year, air and ground.

And what of the 182 issue with Seniors? A new SM with a new PPL can get qualified quickly to fly a CAP 172, but needs 100 hours before he can be a 182 PIC.  May be an issue, or not. But something to ponder.

[Eclipse]

In looking at those stats, is everything at the top 'A' missions since its totaled under it as AFAM?

They could be A or B as AFAMs.

Are self-pay 'C' proficiency flights part of 'Corporate' shown?

Presumably no, since by design a C isn't an "AFAM".  CAP does a lot of customer-funded flying
which presumably isn't captured in the above.

[Eclipse]

The red numbers are the ones that should give the leadership pause, especially O-Rides.
When you consider how much most wings hammer getting cadets in the air, it's a wonder
those numbers continue to fall.

As CAP buys more and more C-182s .... how will this affect Cadet training? We have Cadets taking primary training in our 172 that would not be possible with a 182. Seems to me CAP should be pushing Cadet training more. With a PPL costing about half what a Part 91 school wants, we could have new Cadets lined up at the door.

Cadet powered training is such a small percentage of flying hours that it's barely a blip - a few flight academies,
a few encampments, and the occasional scholarship.  Most wings maintain a couple of 172s for this or similar purposes, or
can borrow them from neighbors.  I'm not aware that the lack of appropriate airframes has been indicated in
the list of challenges to get cadets pilot training, at least not in my region.

The red numbers are the ones that should give the leadership pause, especially O-Rides.ne thing - if your wing isn't flying, it's not due to lack of money, and at least East of the Mississippi,
there's been plenty of mission work this year, air and ground.

And what of the 182 issue with Seniors? A new SM with a new PPL can get qualified quickly to fly a CAP 172, but needs 100 hours before he can be a 182 PIC.  May be an issue, or not. But something to ponder.

I guess if all the 172s are mustered out, this will be an issue, but like what I said above, this
hasn't been on the list of conversations regarding senior members not flying, then again we
still have a couple, so there's that.

[PHall]

The biggest reason I've seen here in California for the drop in Cadet O Flights is the drop in O Flight Pilots.
There are more then a few of our pilots who simply don't want to deal with the additional requirements anymore.
And the revamped Cadet Protection programs has scared off more then a few too.

[Eclipse]

And the revamped Cadet Protection programs has scared off more then a few too.

I do hear that from time to time and don't understand it - there's been no change to the policy in regards to flight ops.

[Briank]

Locally, o-flights just ran into bad luck this year.  Seems like every time an o-flight day was scheduled for a unit, we'd either have bad weather roll in or the plane would be down with some issue.  Both SAREXs I attended had flight hours cut short due to weather too.  Combined with an allergy season that never ended (and kept some pilots self-grounded) it just was not a good flying year.

The 172 vs. 182 thing is a good point.  I'm comfortable in either, but my wife really isn't a big fan of high performance/constant speed props (even though she's got the endorsement and the hours).  I'd imagine others are in the same boat, so I'm sure it cuts down on willing pilots.  However, what choice is there?  With the limited capacity of the current 172s (they're effectively 2 seaters for today's modern adult, that rear seat is just a fancy package shelf in most cases) if you want a truly mission capable airplane it has to be a 182.

Next year is almost certainly going to be worse too, but for different reasons.  I hear there's plenty of money available, but that's no good if you don't have airplanes.  My wing just lost 2 airplanes this year (that won't be replaced), and I'm told there won't even be one in my part of the state at all.

Might as well re-brand as the Civil Ground Patrol (just kidding, I think...  Sigh.)...

[kcebnaes]

Here's hoping my group can help change some of those numbers for this coming year for the better!

Also, BrianK- check your CAP email. 

[SarDragon]

The biggest reason I've seen here in California for the drop in Cadet O Flights is the drop in O Flight Pilots.
There are more then a few of our pilots who simply don't want to deal with the additional requirements anymore.
And the revamped Cadet Protection programs has scared off more then a few too.

On top of that, down here in my part of the world (SoCal), we've had weather, and maintenance issues, get in the way of O-flights. Annnnnd, one of our 182's got wrecked in August, which didn't help things.

[PHall]

And the revamped Cadet Protection programs has scared off more then a few too.

I do hear that from time to time and don't understand it - there's been no change to the policy in regards to flight ops.

I think it was the way the revamped program was presented.

[PHall]

The biggest reason I've seen here in California for the drop in Cadet O Flights is the drop in O Flight Pilots.
There are more then a few of our pilots who simply don't want to deal with the additional requirements anymore.
And the revamped Cadet Protection programs has scared off more then a few too.

On top of that, down here in my part of the world (SoCal), we've had weather, and maintenance issues, get in the way of O-flights. Annnnnd, one of our 182's got wrecked in August, which didn't help things.

That and the fact the it "seems" that O-Flights are at the bottom of the priority list when reserving aircraft.
At least that's the way it appears from our end.

[etodd]

Are self-pay 'C' proficiency flights part of 'Corporate' shown?

Presumably no, since by design a C isn't an "AFAM".  CAP does a lot of customer-funded flying
which presumably isn't captured in the above.

Looking at the top chart in my OP, isn't the total at the bottom all inclusive of CAP flight hours?

Where do self pay C flights appear?  Isn't customer -funded flying  included in the top line: DSCA/DR ?

[etodd]

Cadet powered training is such a small percentage of flying hours that it's barely a blip - a few flight academies,
a few encampments, and the occasional scholarship.

We have Cadets taking primary training as self paid flights with our Squadron's CFIs. Another one will start in the Spring. Two more interested with parents looking into finances.

Are we that unique? Do other Squadrons not have any Cadets interested in taking lessons and with the finances to do so? Its so much cheaper than outside of CAP.

If not ... why not? We should be encouraging it. Creating Cadet pilots who will become future Senior Member pilots.

Do we have a shortage of CFIs who are willing to teach primary students? If so, what can we do to change that?

[Eclipse]

Are self-pay 'C' proficiency flights part of 'Corporate' shown?

Presumably no, since by design a C isn't an "AFAM".  CAP does a lot of customer-funded flying
which presumably isn't captured in the above.

Looking at the top chart in my OP, isn't the total at the bottom all inclusive of CAP flight hours?

No - not if this is a list of AFAMS

Where do self pay C flights appear?  Isn't customer -funded flying  included in the top line: DSCA/DR ?

DSCA = Defense Security Cooperation Agency  Defense Support of Civil Authorities
Quoth the wiki:
"The Defense Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA), as part of the United States Department of Defense (DoD), provides financial and technical assistance, transfer of defense matériel, training and services to allies, and promotes military-to-military contacts. Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA) is the process by which United States military assets and personnel can be used to assist in missions normally carried out by civil authorities."

"C" missions, as in "Corporate" are not "Air Force Assigned Missions".

This list looks like all USAF managed appropriations and 1AF directed / funded operations for or with other DOD and .gov agencies.

**** Edit: Egg Nog, and presents clouded my response.

Yes - it appears "C" missions are in the second part of the chart under Corporate, those would be the local agency support,
non-AFAM DR, etc., etc.

[Eclipse]

Cadet powered training is such a small percentage of flying hours that it's barely a blip - a few flight academies,
a few encampments, and the occasional scholarship.

We have Cadets taking primary training as self paid flights with our Squadron's CFIs. Another one will start in the Spring. Two more interested with parents looking into finances.

Are we that unique?

For the most part, yes.

Do other Squadrons not have any Cadets interested in taking lessons and with the finances to do so? Its so much cheaper than outside of CAP.

It's only "cheaper" if you attend an academy or have interested CFIs.

If not ... why not? We should be encouraging it. Creating Cadet pilots who will become future Senior Member pilots.

Do we have a shortage of CFIs who are willing to teach primary students? If so, what can we do to change that?

A "shortage" pre-supposes there is a number which would be adequate.  Obviously that number is "non-zero", but CAP
doesn't recruit CFIs, per se to do cadet flight instruction.

I can say that with the GA community shrinking in general each year, including the loss of regional and local airports,
there are a lot of CFIs who have had to move on to other occupations, not to mention the general aging of the GA community
which in turn means retiring pilots. In my area pilots and CFIs, especially those with time for CAP, are getting harder and harder to find.

And while renting CAP aircraft for flight instructions is cheaper in most cases then your average FBO's bird's nest / trainer plane,
there are non-trivial issues of availability, proximity, and approvals.  We should encourage cadet flight training,
but that should also be lower on the totem pole then O-rides, Missions, and SAR training, which isn't going to leave a lot of hours
left on those birds out of the 100 between maintenance.

And lastly, for every kid with a gleam in his eye to "touch the face of God", there's a thousand who just aren't interested,
and while CAP may offer cheaper opportunities (in some places, when the stars align) learning to fly is in no way "cheap"
and a lot of families would be hard-pressed to afford $5-10k especially before college, and even more so when a good college-based
aviation program is probably a better way to get your PPL and invest the money.

[sardak]

DSCA = Defense Security Cooperation Agency

While this is one official use of the acronym, DSCA referred to in this chart and in other CAP documents means Defense Support of Civil Authorities. There is a entire appendix in DoD Manual 3025.01 Volume 1, Defense Support of Civil Authorities devoted to CAP. CAP is also referenced in DoD Directive 3025.18, DSCA, and Joint Pub 3-28, DSCA. Current versions of all are attached.

Mike

[attachment deleted by admin]

[etodd]

It's only "cheaper" if you attend an academy or have interested CFIs.

I can understand the fact of most CFIs wanting to charge for their services outside of CAP and feeling that giving lessons inside of CAP is hurting their income stream.

I've recruited 3 new Cadets to our Squadron in the last year, but want to take it up a notch. I'm working toward Commercial currently and hoping to get to CFI for the sole purpose of training Cadets as primary students. My way of 'giving back' and to help get more young folks interested in aviation.

We should encourage cadet flight training,
but that should also be lower on the totem pole then O-rides, Missions, and SAR training, which isn't going to leave a lot of hours
left on those birds out of the 100 between maintenance.

The average CAP plane is not anywhere near getting the desired 200 hours per year. They are only being used 3-4 hours per week. That leaves quite a bit of time they could be used for training. But yes ... having enough willing CFIs is a key factor.

And lastly, for every kid with a gleam in his eye to "touch the face of God", there's a thousand who just aren't interested,
and while CAP may offer cheaper opportunities (in some places, when the stars align) learning to fly is in no way "cheap"
and a lot of families would be hard-pressed to afford $5-10k especially before college, and even more so when a good college-based
aviation program is probably a better way to get your PPL and invest the money.

I know one teenage kid here that is driving a $500 junk car he paid cash for, while his buddies are driving $20-30k vehicles to school, because he is using the money they use for car payments to fly 2-3 lessons a month. Its all about priorities and desire. It may only be one out of a thousand kids, but I really want to help that one.

[Spaceman3750]

The average CAP plane is not anywhere near getting the desired 200 hours per year. They are only being used 3-4 hours per week.

You should probably do the math on that one...

[GaryVC]

I an still wondering about "wondering." You think they would have proofread the chart.

[SarDragon]

I've recruited 3 new Cadets to our Squadron in the last year, but want to take it up a notch. I'm working toward Commercial currently and hoping to get to CFI for the sole purpose of training Cadets as primary students. My way of 'giving back' and to help get more young folks interested in aviation.

Noble intention, but I'm not sure that a newly minted instructor is the best choice for training cadets. IMHO.

The average CAP plane is not anywhere near getting the desired 200 hours per year. They are only being used 3-4 hours per week. That leaves quite a bit of time they could be used for training. But yes ... having enough willing CFIs is a key factor.

Really? CAWG manages to average right at 200 hrs/yr for its fleet, and it's in the top five in size. I think the other big wings also manage this.

As for the math, 4 hrs/wk * 52 weeks = 208, right on target.

[PHall]

I've recruited 3 new Cadets to our Squadron in the last year, but want to take it up a notch. I'm working toward Commercial currently and hoping to get to CFI for the sole purpose of training Cadets as primary students. My way of 'giving back' and to help get more young folks interested in aviation.

Noble intention, but I'm not sure that a newly minted instructor is the best choice for training cadets. IMHO.

The average CAP plane is not anywhere near getting the desired 200 hours per year. They are only being used 3-4 hours per week. That leaves quite a bit of time they could be used for training. But yes ... having enough willing CFIs is a key factor.

Really? CAWG manages to average right at 200 hrs/yr for its fleet, and it's in the top five in size. I think the other big wings also manage this.

As for the math, 4 hrs/wk * 52  50 weeks = 208 200, right on target.

You forgot the two weeks of downtime for maintenance and the Annual. 

[SarDragon]

Meh. It's all about averages.

We've been averaging almost a month for our annuals. The 182 we used to have spent almost four months in maintenance last year, and barely made 100 hours, but we flew the 206 enough to still average close to 200 for both planes.

[etodd]

I've recruited 3 new Cadets to our Squadron in the last year, but want to take it up a notch. I'm working toward Commercial currently and hoping to get to CFI for the sole purpose of training Cadets as primary students. My way of 'giving back' and to help get more young folks interested in aviation.

Noble intention, but I'm not sure that a newly minted instructor is the best choice for training cadets. IMHO.

The average CAP plane is not anywhere near getting the desired 200 hours per year. They are only being used 3-4 hours per week. That leaves quite a bit of time they could be used for training. But yes ... having enough willing CFIs is a key factor.

Really? CAWG manages to average right at 200 hrs/yr for its fleet, and it's in the top five in size. I think the other big wings also manage this.

As for the math, 4 hrs/wk * 52  50 weeks = 208 200, right on target.

You forgot the two weeks of downtime for maintenance and the Annual. 

3 hours a week ... 4 or 5 .... even 10 for the really busy Squadron ... still leaves a plane just sitting there the majority of the time.  Plenty of available time no matter how you figure it. Some Squadrons are interested, some are not. No big deal.

Noble intention, but I'm not sure that a newly minted instructor is the best choice for training cadets. IMHO.

Yeah ... but I'm a 975 hour pilot with over 30 years of mentoring students. I'm ready for the next step of officially being able to sign a logbook. 

[SarDragon]

Kool beans. Good to go.

Sent from my phone.