Senator John McCain claims CAP is Pork Barrel Spending (Again)

[JeffDG]

Of course it doesn't.  Sometimes you won't get a 406 signal.  But when you do, you know the lat/lon.

Only if it's attached to an optional GPS, otherwise, it's DFing a signal.

[lordmonar]

Of course it doesn't.  Sometimes you won't get a 406 signal.  But when you do, you know the lat/lon.

Only if it's attached to an optional GPS, otherwise, it's DFing a signal.

Yes but even with straight DF you get a tighter fix and it only requires one pass.

[NCRblues]

We survived!!

Amendment 50 will not be considered into HR 933, as just agreed to by the senate!!

[lordmonar]

We survived!!

Amendment 50 will not be considered into HR 933, as just agreed to by the senate!!

Also...it is not like CAP was going to completly grounded if this amendment passed.  We would not get any new aircraft and would have cut back on some things......but we were going to survive anyways.

[JeffDG]

Here's the final list of amendments to be considered in the vote-a-palooza at 1415 EDT:

http://democrats.senate.gov/2013/03/20/agreement-on-h-r-933-continuing-appropriations-series-of-votes-at-215pm/

-          Coburn #69 (prohibits Urban Area Security Initiative Grants not improving homeland security);

-          Coburn #93 transfers appropriations from National Heritage Partnership Program to fund White House public tours, Maintenance at public parks/monuments);

-          Coburn #65, as modified with the changes that are at the desk (National Science Foundation funding);

-          Coburn #70, as modified with the changes that are at the desk (Authorizing Committees to receive information from Homeland Security);

-          Inhofe-Hagan #72, as modified with changes that are at the desk (requires Secretaries of Military Departments to carry out tuition assistance programs);

-          Mikulski-Shelby #98, as modified with changes that are at the desk (technical corrections); and

-          Leahy #129, as modified with changes that are at the desk (cluster munitions);

-          Pryor-Blunt #82 (meat inspectors);

-          Toomey #115, as modified with changes at the desk (bio-fuels)

-          Mikulski-Shelby #26 (Substitute) (majority vote threshold);

-          Cloture on H.R.933, as amended; and

If cloture is invoked all post-cloture debate time will be yielded back

-          Passage of H.R.933, Department of Defense, Military Construction and Veterans Affairs, and Full-Year Continuing Appropriations Act, 2013 (majority vote threshold).

[FW]

We survived!!

Amendment 50 will not be considered into HR 933, as just agreed to by the senate!!

Also...it is not like CAP was going to completly grounded if this amendment passed.  We would not get any new aircraft and would have cut back on some things......but we were going to survive anyways.

Since it no longer matters, the cut would have cost the fleet 100 aircraft "in service" and the loss of around 30 employees. Not devistating, just real bad... 

[a2capt]

How does that work, in service? Meaning keep them, just not fly them, or forced to sell them? For the military/government, they just send them to Davis-Monthan or similar and they get 'foil' on the windows with minimal attention. For our level, that means tie down still needs to be paid, you can't just send them someplace.

[FW]

The Air Force "owns" the aircraft. CAP could relocate them at AFBs around the country for storage. If they were sold, the cash can only be used for aircraft upgrades, maintenance and purchase of new.   

I doubt NHQ would require the membership to deal with the issue financially.

[SarDragon]

Somebody always pays in the end.  Transfer the costs to the counties and they will pay.  If they start billing the crash victims/actors then their insurance will pay.  Those who operate equipment that can lead to such events will inevitably have higher premiums.  How much higher? Who knows.  Enough to push some number out of flying?  Maybe.  There are then downwind economic impacts of that.

There's a big problem here - the counties aren't any better funded than the feds. We have a county here in CA that almost one-third the size of your whole state. They're just as broke as everyone else. (They also happen to be one of the counties who cooperate well with CAP.)

[abdsp51]

There's a big problem here - the counties aren't any better funded than the feds. We have a county here in CA that almost one-third the size of your whole state. They're just as broke as everyone else. (They also happen to be one of the counties who cooperate well with CAP.)

LA, San Bern, or Riverside?

[bosshawk]

Probably San Bernadino: they are one of several that are going broke in the state.  San Bernadino also happens to have one of the largest SAR organizations in the state.

[SarDragon]

There's a big problem here - the counties aren't any better funded than the feds. We have a county here in CA that almost one-third the size of your whole state. They're just as broke as everyone else. (They also happen to be one of the counties who cooperate well with CAP.)

LA, San Bern, or Riverside?

SB, biggest county in the lower 48. Riverside is 4th in CA, and LA is 11th.

[RiverAux]

The Air Force "owns" the aircraft.

How so?  I thought that they were assets of CAP the corporation.  Are they actually owned by USAF and somehow loaned to CAP? 

[The CyBorg is destroyed]

I'd love to know what this clown's beef is with CAP.

Rumour is that his wife was a member years ago and had a bad experience - cannot confirm/deny that.

Other than that...I have no idea, except that we are his favourite target for straw man arguments regarding "wasteful" DOD spending.

Basically, he wants us moved out of DoD and, by extension, any association with the Air Force.  He views us as more or less SAR/DR/ES and believes DoD should only drop bombs and break things, and we don't fit in with that.

Back in 1995 he wanted us moved to the Department of Transportation.

Also...it is not like CAP was going to completly grounded if this amendment passed.  We would not get any new aircraft and would have cut back on some things......but we were going to survive anyways.

That's as maybe, but I wonder what we would be expected to do: fly our current aircraft until they start augering into the ground, and what would we have had to "cut back?"

That pretty much says that the AF will not be in the business of doing SAR in the future, so why would they pay CAP to do it?  All we really do for them is as a kind of auxillary junior AFROTC program, which compared to fuel for airplanes and weapons to drop on America's enemies, is clearly of a lesser importance.

My main point - there has been a stragetic shift in the landscape from even just 5 years ago.  That shift has changed CAP's relationship with the AF.  Because of that change, we should expect that the funding aspects will change.

Which is why I raised the "devils' advocacy" earlier regarding our necessity, or lack thereof, to the Air Force, and used the example of the RAF's Royal Observer Corps as an example of a once-essential supplement to a military service that was judged to be no longer needed.

I would really like for us to be closely integrated with the Air Force and be essential to their functioning, but wishes and reality too often aren't the same thing.

[Devil Doc]

So, I dont have to worry about my Training this weekend? I dont wanna be flying around in the CAP plane taking pictures with the fear of it going down, because, oh we had to cut back, and something was left in or off the engine. lol

[Eclipse]

OK, can we now please get back to the digitals?

"Why, what's the matter,
That you have such a February face,
So full of frost, of storm and cloudiness?"

[jimmydeanno]

The Air Force "owns" the aircraft. CAP could relocate them at AFBs around the country for storage. If they were sold, the cash can only be used for aircraft upgrades, maintenance and purchase of new.   

I doubt NHQ would require the membership to deal with the issue financially.

What do you mean, the AF "owns" the aircraft?  The titles to them are sitting at NHQ with "Civil Air Patrol" written on them.  CAP "owns" the airplanes.

[FW]

The Air Force "owns" the aircraft. CAP could relocate them at AFBs around the country for storage. If they were sold, the cash can only be used for aircraft upgrades, maintenance and purchase of new.   

I doubt NHQ would require the membership to deal with the issue financially.

What do you mean, the AF "owns" the aircraft?  The titles to them are sitting at NHQ with "Civil Air Patrol" written on them.  CAP "owns" the airplanes.

The Air Force "owns" the aircraft.

How so?  I thought that they were assets of CAP the corporation.  Are they actually owned by USAF and somehow loaned to CAP?

Very true however, the Air Force has always taken the position that anything purchased with government dollars belongs to the government.  It is also true about vehicles, computers and anything else we "get" from our grant.  If we ever had to stand down any part of our fleet, the Air Force would most likely "ask" to take them for storage until we could "reactivate" them.
Nice part of this conversation; we don't have to worry about it now...

[RiverAux]

Well, they can ask all they want, but unless it is part of the grant agreement or some obscure federal law (neither of which I'd rule out), CAP wouldn't have to comply. 

[SarDragon]

The FAA registrations have Civil Air Patrol on them, meaning they are owned by the corporation, even though the AF might have paid for them.