Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
September 21, 2018, 05:17:08 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10

 1 
 on: Today at 03:24:49 PM 
Started by Starbird - Last post by Starbird
Some of my cadets show similar. I don't know what happened with it, but it's nothing detrimental since the promotions are already entered and the cadets are well beyond those grades now.

Does it seem like it affected anything for you now? Or is it mostly just an inconvenience for your own historical tracking purposes?

It’s just an annoyance for my personal record keeping, it’s not hurting my CAP career in any way.  I just really like my records straight, call it an obsession....

 2 
 on: Today at 03:19:58 PM 
Started by Holding Pattern - Last post by TheSkyHornet
Push the button once the promotion has been 'approved' by the Commander. Don't hold people up to make it an administrative thing or to align with a particular date. That just drags out the timeline for the next promotion; especially cadets.

What happens if they can't pin for a month (because reasons)? You're going to hold them up a month?

 3 
 on: Today at 03:17:52 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by TheSkyHornet
If the POH doesn't indicate hand-starting the propeller to power the engine, then you shouldn't be hand-starting it. Seems like we established that. So, I agree; it's entirely appropriate to ask why he would be hand-starting without an approved procedure. Seems to me like reading the checklist would establish that there is no procedure; thus, it shouldn't be done.

NOTE: The POH does provide instructions for hand-rotating the prop to prime it in cold weather conditions, with the ignition off.

If you don't have a qualified pilot sitting at the controls when hand-cranking an engine, you shouldn't be doing it.

The "letter" at the end of the video indicates that the pilot had previously stated the aircraft did not have enough battery juice to start the plane, indicating that he was intending to fire it up by hand. He asked for a power pack. He was told it was unknown. He asked for mechanics and was told they would not be in until Monday (Sep 10; this was on Sep 8). The FAA accident notification report states this was a "hand prop of an engine."

Signs indicate---and yes, it's just an assumption; not factual---that he decided "The heck with it" and cranked her up. Bad decisions were made on the sole part of the PIC.

Possible maintenance discrepancies included, you do not start an aircraft without someone having positive control of the aircraft. This did not occur.

 4 
 on: Today at 02:35:07 PM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by Blanding
It's impossible to know the answers without investigation. My opinion: simply calling out the pilot for making mistakes does no real benefit to the community.

There were two people their, one was standing on the wing on the passenger side. Why wasn't someone in the aircraft to flip switches and ensure a safe start?

It's possible that the person in the airplane who jumped out was not a pilot or had no familiarity with the Cirrus, or was not instructed to do anything during the evolution. Also, it's possible that the passenger was startled when the airplane started moving, so rather than go "along for the ride" decided to jump off.

Quote
Why did the pilot doing the hand propping run directly in front of the propeller to get to the cockpit?

Because the pilot side door was to his right. How much time exactly did he have to perceive the situation? Not enough for the rational part of the brain to override his decision.

Quote
Why weren't the breaks applied?


You don't know they weren't; again, this is where an investigation is required. The SR-22 maintenance manual lists several possible causes of brakes not holding:

-Contaminated brake lining.
-Improper conditioning of brake linings.
-Brake linings worn below minimum wear limits.
-Brake disk worn below minimum wear limits.
-Brake lining carbonized (overheated).
-Pressure plate contacting torque plate assembly.
-New brake linings not seated in wear track of old brake disk, resulting in partial contact with brake disk.

Quote
Again, there are safe ways to hand prop an airplane, if you follow a checklist. Why wasn't a checklist followed?

There is no procedure / checklist in the Cirrus POH for hand propping the airplane, so according to Cirrus, there is no safe approved way to hand prop the airplane. It would be appropriate to ask why the pilot conducted an unapproved procedure in this airplane, but not why a checklist wasn't followed. Why do pilots conduct unapproved procedures? Usually it's not a willful disregard for their life or property.

Best to let an investigation occur, obviously.

 5 
 on: Today at 02:28:07 PM 
Started by Holding Pattern - Last post by Eclipse
Unless it's intended to be a pleasant surprise, I always hit it the day all the requirements are completed.

 6 
 on: Today at 02:08:34 PM 
Started by Holding Pattern - Last post by arajca
I recommend doing it in Eservices when they've met the requirements (including the PRB), but I've seen it done other ways as well.

Whichever way you use, BE CONSISTENT!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 7 
 on: Today at 01:58:08 PM 
Started by Holding Pattern - Last post by Holding Pattern
Should I promote people immediately after they meet all the technical requirements and promotion board, wait for the day I can pin them, or choose some other strategy?

 8 
 on: Today at 12:04:48 PM 
Started by lam_the_lame - Last post by mdickinson
You {a cadet} wear your highest Cadet Program Achievement ribbon. Same rule the senior members follow.
What “rule the senior members follow”?? [...]
There is no rule about seniors short-stacking. There is a ribbon+device height limit, but beyond that no rule - only one sentence saying we are "encouraged" (:o) to choose our prof.dev. ribbons as the first to go. (See attached snip from M39-1.)

The rule where seniors who are former cadets wear their highest cadet achievement ribbon.

Ah, now I understand what you meant. "same rule that you will follow after you turn senior, regarding wearing only your highest achievement ribbon." Makes sense.

 9 
 on: Today at 11:52:29 AM 
Started by lam_the_lame - Last post by PHall
What about Milestone awards?
What about them? The milestone is a Cadet Program achievement. So as a C/TSgt, you would wear your Rickenbacker ribbon, not your Wright Brothers ribbon.
You wear your highest Cadet Program Achievement ribbon. Same rule the senior members follow.

What “rule the senior members follow”??

(a) there is no rule about seniors short-stacking. There is a ribbon+device height limit, but beyond that no rule - only one sentence saying we are "encouraged" (:o) to choose our prof.dev. ribbons as the first to go. (See attached snip from M39-1.)

(b) when have senior members ever followed a rule - especially one regarding uniform wear?!  ;D




The rule where seniors who are former cadets wear their highest cadet achievement ribbon.

 10 
 on: Today at 10:03:24 AM 
Started by Eclipse - Last post by TheSkyHornet
I see the social media outrage on this subject...and my question is this: How does it differ from an emergency broadcast on television? The medium changed, not the practice of doing it. Nationwide broadcasting through communications technology has been used for quite some time. So this isn't anything new.



From the comments I have seen, the nay sayers think it is going to be used by the President himself to send personal/political messages directly to the country in a twitter esque format vs an emergency alerting platform.

MK

That's exactly what I was getting at...like there's some abuse of my cellphone going on here.

And this is where I want to avoid any political remarks here; but I'm going with it being politically motivated as to why there is this outrage...or as Eclipse called it, "recreational outrage"

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
CAP Talk  |  Recent Posts


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.14 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.05 seconds with 15 queries.