Proficient Pilot Patch ..

[a2capt]

Okay, the paragraph says that "pilot members" that complete the first phase of FAA Wings can wear the Proficient Pilot patch. I get that part.

f. FAA Wings Program - Wing safety officers will encourage pilot members to participate in the FAA Wings Program. Members who complete the basic phase of this program will be eligible to wear the Pilot Proficiency Patch on flight clothing.

The pivotal part of my query is .. what constitutes a "pilot member", and is that definition in writing someplace that can be cited?

It would seem to me that a pilot member would be someone that is eligible to wear CAP Pilot Wings, no?

..and therefor, if you are not eligible to wear CAP Pilot Wings, you are not a "Pilot Member"? 

[jeders]

I've always defined it as whether or not they've done a Form 5. No Form 5, not a "pilot member".

[mdickinson]

Okay, the paragraph says that "pilot members" that complete the first phase of FAA Wings can wear the Proficient Pilot patch.

No, that's not what it says.  Read it again more carefully:

Wing safety officers will encourage pilot members to participate in the FAA Wings Program.
Members who complete the basic phase of this program will be eligible to wear the Pilot Proficiency Patch on flight clothing.

It doesn't say anything about "pilot members" being eligible to wear the patch. it says members who complete the "basic phase" of the FAA Wings program are eligible to wear it.

(I've never seen the term "pilot member" used before, but since it's only used here to define who the wing safety officer is supposed to encourage, it's clear that it means "members who are pilots." Whether they are CAP rated doesn't matter; encourage them to participate in wings.)


While I've never seen anyone wearing the Proficient Pilot patch who wasn't a CAP rated pilot, it appears (from 62-1 at least) that someone who's never earned their CAP wings could wear it.


Question: Is this paragraph in 62-1 the only place that describes the requirements for this patch? I seem to recall the requirements for it were in 60-1 sometime in the past.

I also recall from 15 years ago that there used to be a more stringent requirement for this patch - one had to have completed a wings phase within the past year, or something like that. I even remember removing it from my uniform one year that I didn't participate in the FAA Wings program.

Sort of sad to think that now, someone could complete a single phase of wings, back in the first year they earned their private certificate, and wear that patch for the rest of their life, even after they no longer hold a medical or a current form 5.

Question: What do y'all think the requirements for this patch should be? [edit to clarify]I would be in favor of a change in the regs that would make this patch worn only by those who are both

• A current CAP pilot, i.e. someone who holds an unexpired CAPF 5
• A wings phase completion within the past 24 months

[/list]

[UH60guy]

Question: What do y'all think the requirements for this patch should be? I would submit that it should be worn only by those who are both

• A current CAP pilot, i.e. someone who holds an unexpired CAPF 5
• A wings phase completion within the past 24 months

I'd recommend doing away with it altogether. This may sound like sour grapes coming from a member who is a pilot but is not CAP-rated (am I a pilot member? I wonder.), but my reasons are more than that.

• This feeds the duplication of awards (like our star on badge for senior rating and star on ribbon, AE Master and Crossfield, etc) when they already have CAP wings and can already get an FAA Wings pin
• Your CAP wings already speak volumes more. Your Form 5 covers most of the Wings program, all it takes is a few 20-minute online classes.
• I'm against temporary awards in general (would you pay to remove it and later add it back if you temporarily let your Wings cert, Form 5, Medical, or BFR expire?)
• It doesn't have added value- I wouldn't want to fly with a "non-proficient" pilot!

[a2capt]

No, that's not what it says.  Read it again more carefully:

Your nit pick of my opening comment was addressed in the other two sentences in the form of, if "pilot member" is the pivotal part or not, and you came to the same questions.

"Eligible" means "have they met the requirements" and "has it been documented/requested and approved" as applicable to the situation/request.

So with just that one small paragraph, I really can't see anything that says if someone simply has completed that, that there is anything else required. As if there was something more that got chopped in a revision to a supporting regulation.

Be it as it may, the  thing I'm trying to ascertain is does the member even have to hold a pilot rating?

Before you laugh.. it is a valid question since there seems to be no definition otherwise.

Except that in this day and era, I believe you've got to actually posses some type of airman certificate to have the Wings system award you Wings Phase completion credits, so that in and of it self could be a qualifier.

But now, say said member is currently a student pilot, has not passed a check ride at the time of the sewing machine hitting the fabric, but has completed basic Wings Phase 1.

According to the paragraph, they've met the requirement, except what defines a pilot member, because the paragraph hinges itself on Wing Safety Officers encouraging pilot members to participate, it would certainly seem that means some kind of pilot that is recognized by CAP and the basis for all of those is the CAPF 5.

Which means you've got to hold at least a PPSEL since that would apply to both the aircraft and aerodromes we generally operate from, and not even bother with the minimum hours required for various ratings.

Which brings up the issue of "flight clothing", that other than being a CAP pilot, would be worn by someone holding at least a MS rating, as that is the gateway to getting in the aircraft as a crew member. Would a MS that holds a pilot rating of -any- kind, but has not pursued a CAPF 5, and can not otherwise act in any capacity with regards to operating the aircraft for CAP, be a "pilot member", that would be encouraged by the "Wing Safety Officer"?

[UH60guy]

Now my brain hurts.

This is just one reason I dislike double dipping of awards for a single event (here forcompleting wings), and especially when multiple organizations' bureaucracies come crashing together.