National Power Academy

Started by flyguy06, February 09, 2007, 04:19:47 PM

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

flyguy06

I am currently working on my Flight Instructor lisence. Eventually I want to be able to instruct at the National Power Academy. What it is like there?

I, being a military guy, envision a sort of comdesed version of the USAF's UPT. Where you have two students linked up with a CFI.

Is it at all military oriented or is just some students going out with a CFI like at an FBO? I am looking for a more military program.

CFI_Ed

It's normally planned for two students tied to the same IP for flying; one in front, and one in back.  Normal uniform is shorts and an encampment T-shirt due to heat.  There are only nine or so days for instruction so we do the best we can.  Not sure what you mean by a condensed UPT?  In regards to educational enviroment , psychological stress, or ...? 

Ed
Ed Angala, Lt Col, CAP
Oklahoma Wing/DO

flyguy06

No. no. nothing like that. I meant in its formality. Do have stand ups? Do they report to their IP's in a military fashoin? Or is it just "ok,lets go do our preflight" Just curious if its something I want to get involved with.

flyguy06

I wok with a non profit organization and Delta Airlines wher ethey sponsor a similar camp for two weks and take ten students. The goal is to solo them in 14 days. Lastyear, we soloed all ten. The year before i think they soloed nine if the ten

NEBoom

Quote from: flyguy06 on February 09, 2007, 09:35:20 PM
No. no. nothing like that. I meant in its formality. Do have stand ups? Do they report to their IP's in a military fashoin? Or is it just "ok,lets go do our preflight" Just curious if its something I want to get involved with.

Can't speak for the others, but the one held here in Nebraska is like the latter.  Informal all the way.
Lt Col Dan Kirwan, CAP
Nebraska Wing

DNall

ours is as well, but it might be nice to add a little military to it. NBB is decent mix w/ wierd uniforms "for the heat" but they still have formations & a semblence of disciplined structure. That's an important part of flying.

CFI_Ed

#6
Quote from: flyguy06 on February 09, 2007, 09:35:20 PM
No. no. nothing like that. I meant in its formality. Do have stand ups? Do they report to their IP's in a military fashoin? Or is it just "ok,lets go do our preflight" Just curious if its something I want to get involved with.


By chance, I was "asked" ::) to be the Director for the Oklahoma Flight Encampment this year when the incumbent's (who was last year's Director) work and CAP's taskings increased.  I'll pass on the suggestion regarding the reporting in a military fashion to the IP to the staff (I like it).  Last year's Director thought that Powered Encampment strayed a bit away from military discipline and he wanted to change that for this year.
Ed Angala, Lt Col, CAP
Oklahoma Wing/DO

DNall

Well I tell ya, I think cadets would approeciate it a lot more. Especially if you tell them this is how it's done at UPT & they don't think it's about stroking the ego of the IP. If you're only doing 10-15-20 cadets I bet you can even get sizes from them in advance & get a flightsuit for each them from surplus. You may not want them flying in that four hours a day, but it's a nice bonus.

Jolt

I think I remember that the FAA had a limit on the amount of time a CFI could do flight training in one day (I don't particularly want to look it up, but I trust my source).  Is this ever a problem at NFA, sir?  I don't remember hearing anything about it at NFA-G last summer.

CFI_Ed

Quote from: DNall on February 10, 2007, 04:36:07 AM
Well I tell ya, I think cadets would approeciate it a lot more. Especially if you tell them this is how it's done at UPT & they don't think it's about stroking the ego of the IP. If you're only doing 10-15-20 cadets I bet you can even get sizes from them in advance & get a flightsuit for each them from surplus. You may not want them flying in that four hours a day, but it's a nice bonus.

I'll ask about the flight suits.  It'll be way too hot to fly in those suckers though, but maybe as an incentive towards the goal of their private pilots license.
Ed Angala, Lt Col, CAP
Oklahoma Wing/DO

CFI_Ed

Quote from: Jolt on February 11, 2007, 12:57:08 AM
I think I remember that the FAA had a limit on the amount of time a CFI could do flight training in one day (I don't particularly want to look it up, but I trust my source).  Is this ever a problem at NFA, sir?  I don't remember hearing anything about it at NFA-G last summer.

As far as I know, the flight training limitation normally won't be a factor for NFA-P.  I'm more worried about the fatigue factor for IPs and students.  Flying in a 172 when the temperature on the ramp is 100+ degrees is not conducive to a effective flight training environment.  Flying a 1.0, doing a student seat swap, another 1.0; then debrief, get ready for the next lesson, fly  again; Lunch; do it again, then repeat one more time will wear out the students if not instructor by the third or fourth day.
Ed Angala, Lt Col, CAP
Oklahoma Wing/DO

DNall

Quote from: CFI_Ed on February 11, 2007, 02:34:47 AM
Quote from: DNall on February 10, 2007, 04:36:07 AM
Well I tell ya, I think cadets would approeciate it a lot more. Especially if you tell them this is how it's done at UPT & they don't think it's about stroking the ego of the IP. If you're only doing 10-15-20 cadets I bet you can even get sizes from them in advance & get a flightsuit for each them from surplus. You may not want them flying in that four hours a day, but it's a nice bonus.
I'll ask about the flight suits.  It'll be way too hot to fly in those suckers though, but maybe as an incentive towards the goal of their private pilots license.
Sure. We fly grids in Texas summer wearing them, and that blows, but it's safety gear. The kids would love them & they'd be great as UOD for the final banquet & wing pinning. Those kids aren't there to learn how to fly cessnas as a hobby. They're there for a stepping stone to a dream. You can reinforce that & create a lot of energy they'll carry back into their programs.

Jolt

It would be great, but the patches have to be individually printed (and it's human nature to sometimes make mistakes and spell things wrong and that's a pain), and someone has to do the Velcro/sewing.  I think that one thing a lot of the cadets like is being able to go for the week and not have to do the military things that they usually have to do all of the time.  We enjoyed being able to call each other by our first names and we liked just being a group of people with similar interests and not having to be cadets that were all business all of the time.  That's just what I observed though.

Otherwise I think flight suits are an awesome idea, sir.  They would probably work like berets work for NBB, except flight suits actually have a purpose and they're not just to show off.  Maybe one NFA-P (out of the three?) could test out if the cadets like the way the activity is run if it's modeled after UPT.  I agree.  Find a cadet or composite squadron out there that doesn't have at least one cadet that wants to be an AF pilot and I would be surprised.

Since it's too hot to fly with the suits on during the day, would it be possible for the cadets to wear them during the morning or late afternoon when it's usually a bit cooler?

DNall

I wasn't thinking of providing patches (which are mostly pre-velcro'd), & was refering to metal wings to pin at the end as appropriate.

Cadets get tired of wearing blues/BDUs after a while & hate the same boring stuff they do every night at Sq, which is not very military in the first place. Wearing a flt suit though, as well as some formatting from UPT, would go over quite well. Just a touch of formaility & structure to keep it efficient & keyed in. Some situational awareness & attention to detail activities, some opening/closing, reporting in & out, IPs getting together at teh end of the night to report he progress & issues for each student (that's real helpful). This is UPT we're talking about, not honor guard, it's not that military, but a little top gun element to push that morale into productive energy when they get back & show them the meaning behind some of the things that have to learn locally, that's all good stuff.

Far as needing to wear it. You should brief it as safety gear that should be worn during high risk flying but is hot & you need to be cautious of heat/hydration anyway. I wouldn't actually give it to them till the end though. Have it on their bunks at the end of the last day to change into prior to combat dining-in type even where you can pin wings as needed & hand out certificates & such.

Pace

I think NFA is exactly where it needs to be on the discipline scale.  If cadets want a UPT environment, then they need to go to SUPTFC.  Remember that one of the purposes of SUPT is to weed out the ones that can't keep up with the knowledge and stress/structure.  NFA is designed to teach cadets to fly by the most efficient means possible.  Adding stress isn't necessarily efficient.  The relaxed atmosphere between cadets and the IPs was what made the activity and learning so enjoyable and efficient.  Having gone to both SUPTFC (when it was AETCFC) and NFA-P (OK), I doubt as many cadets would have solo'ed at NFA had it been structured even remotely like SUPTFC.

However, I do like the flight suit suggestion, but that's probably because I hated wearing khaki shorts with a bright yellow t-shirt everyday.  I just wish I knew if I was going to have my CFI before summer so I could apply to one of the NFAs.  There's always next year...
Lt Col, CAP

DNall

Quote from: dcpacemaker on February 11, 2007, 04:50:58 PM
I think NFA is exactly where it needs to be on the discipline scale.  If cadets want a UPT environment, then they need to go to SUPTFC.  Remember that one of the purposes of SUPT is to weed out the ones that can't keep up with the knowledge and stress/structure.  NFA is designed to teach cadets to fly by the most efficient means possible.  Adding stress isn't necessarily efficient.  The relaxed atmosphere between cadets and the IPs was what made the activity and learning so enjoyable and efficient.  Having gone to both SUPTFC (when it was AETCFC) and NFA-P (OK), I doubt as many cadets would have solo'ed at NFA had it been structured even remotely like SUPTFC.

However, I do like the flight suit suggestion, but that's probably because I hated wearing khaki shorts with a bright yellow t-shirt everyday.  I just wish I knew if I was going to have my CFI before summer so I could apply to one of the NFAs.  There's always next year...
I said NOTHING of adding stress. Cadets are not stressed by workign in amilitary environment, not in the slightest. Discipline is of key importance in flying, but I hardly mean you need to march anywhere or anything of the sort. The things I'm talkinga bot are highly supportive of the training environment you're wanting to create.

Here's the other thing though, I don't send cadets up there to work their way toward a pilots license for its own sake. It's a reward for hard work locally, it's a place where they are supposed to see practical execution of things that seemed silly when taught as basics at the Sq so when they come back they can tell a cadet that if they can't remember their right form their left while marching then is't going to be a bit of a problem when the controller tells you to turn & you got 10k other things going on at once. Discipline & attention to detail in a busy working envirnment, that's what flying is. Then when they get back with that set of wings everyone else wants they have tobe an example of what I want everyone else to turn into before they can reach this stepping stone, cause the dream beyond it requires what they learn with me. This activity exists to reinforce the development track they're on to turn them into something other than a pilot. Just saying for perspective.

Pace

Quote from: DNall on February 11, 2007, 07:39:14 PM
I said NOTHING of adding stress. Cadets are not stressed by workign in amilitary environment, not in the slightest.
Create an extremely disciplined SUPT environment and that will be exactly what you're doing.  Many cadets will be able to keep up, but some will not; and for $800 there's no reason to add more discipline when the current level is sufficient.  The relaxed environment allows students to more closely interact with (and learn from) their CFIs and AGI.

I think this is yet another case of arguing over an idea someone threw out that'll never see the light of day since many of the CFIs I've encountered aren't former military IPs.

QuoteDiscipline & attention to detail in a busy working envirnment, that's what flying is.
You're preaching to the choir.  I never said NFA shouldn't be disciplined, I said it shouldn't be as disciplined as SUPT.

QuoteThis activity exists to reinforce the development track they're on to turn them into something other than a pilot. Just saying for perspective.
It does?  I never got that feeling while I was there.  I always thought it was to progress a cadet from scratch to solo in a short timeframe to jump-start them towards a future as either a pilot (civilian or military) or some career field in the aerospace industry.  By all means they should be using the skills they've learned as a cadet to apply to their training, but the activity itself is strictly about training cadets to be pilots.
Lt Col, CAP

flyguy06

I envision cadets reporting as a class in the early morning to attned stand ups. If you dont know what a stand up is , its when in class, the instructor asks a question such as "whaqts he engine out procedure". This are checklist items that must be meorized. You cant looki them up in th ePOH. Not enough time. So anyway, the student has to stand up at hi/her seat and recite the checklist. In the USAF if they get it wrong, they dont fly that day. I am not sugesting that for NFA but you could give the cadet an incentive for trying to get the answer right such as let him be the first to fly that day.

Another type of stand up question is procedures inthe traffic pattern (power setings, airspeed GUMP check and so forth) Make it fun and educational.

I wasnt thinking of flight suits due the heat. I was thinking more of BDUs., and nce they solo reward them with flightsuits (afterall, flightsuits are for aviators and until they have soloed technically they are not aviators)

I envision cadets waliking up to their IP, saluting and reporting ready to fly sir.

DNall

Quote from: dcpacemaker on February 11, 2007, 11:50:28 PM
Quote from: DNall on February 11, 2007, 07:39:14 PM
I said NOTHING of adding stress. Cadets are not stressed by workign in amilitary environment, not in the slightest.
Create an extremely disciplined SUPT environment and that will be exactly what you're doing.  Many cadets will be able to keep up, but some will not; and for $800 there's no reason to add more discipline when the current level is sufficient.  The relaxed environment allows students to more closely interact with (and learn from) their CFIs and AGI.

I think this is yet another case of arguing over an idea someone threw out that'll never see the light of day since many of the CFIs I've encountered aren't former military IPs.
I ddn't say extremely disciplined. I didn't even say AS disciplined as what's expected of them every other day of their CAP career. By no means would I want to create a weeding out process, which is by the way not what occurs at primary now. The couple items suggested are far less than what they do every single meeting night, and are designed to reinforce the learning environment.

Opening/closing formation? I think that already happens in a briefing room. Some GLPs to reinforce things like situational awareness & attention to detail... reporting in & out to the IP, which formalizes the times in which they are under the command of that IP versus the school commander... and the IPs getting together at the end of the day to discuss the progress of their students & maybe get advice form another instructor or at least let them know how thigns are going. None of that is remotely challenging for any cadet, and remember these cadets will have been in CAP for a while. They'll be inpired by something that makes it seem a little like military flight training, even if it isn't.

Quote
QuoteDiscipline & attention to detail in a busy working envirnment, that's what flying is.
You're preaching to the choir.  I never said NFA shouldn't be disciplined, I said it shouldn't be as disciplined as SUPT.
Glad we're in agreement then.

Quote
QuoteThis activity exists to reinforce the development track they're on to turn them into something other than a pilot. Just saying for perspective.
It does?  I never got that feeling while I was there.  I always thought it was to progress a cadet from scratch to solo in a short timeframe to jump-start them towards a future as either a pilot (civilian or military) or some career field in the aerospace industry.  By all means they should be using the skills they've learned as a cadet to apply to their training, but the activity itself is strictly about training cadets to be pilots.
I understand at the tactical level cadets get a jumpstart toward a pilot's license, and I'd love to expand that a good bit further.

Strategically though, the reason that we do this training is to improve the people going thru the training & the people they touch because of it, not the technical skill they learn while there. Kids don't understand why they learn drill or why they have to wear their uniform right. I mean if their nametape is sewn on wrong, that isn't going to stop them from finding a crashed plane right? But the attention to detail learned thru simple & sometimes meaningless tasks translates to attention to detail being second nature on not so simple tasks when people's lives & safety depend on it. I think above most anything else we could do with these folks that demonstrating the tie in between those skills learned in previous military training & the flight training they are going thru is huge. that makes them better cadets & better people who then come back & reinforce those points to junior cadets who are still trying to figure out why anyone cares if their uniform looks right or not.

I think if you can do a couple little things here & there to connect those dots for them while experinecing this stepping stone of flight training that you can do a great service to the cadet program & to the individuals lucky enough to attend one of these activities.

Pace

Quote from: flyguy06 on February 12, 2007, 12:38:58 AM
I envision cadets reporting as a class in the early morning to attned stand ups. If you dont know what a stand up is , its when in class, the instructor asks a question such as "whaqts he engine out procedure". This are checklist items that must be meorized. You cant looki them up in th ePOH. Not enough time. So anyway, the student has to stand up at hi/her seat and recite the checklist. In the USAF if they get it wrong, they dont fly that day. I am not sugesting that for NFA but you could give the cadet an incentive for trying to get the answer right such as let him be the first to fly that day.

Another type of stand up question is procedures inthe traffic pattern (power setings, airspeed GUMP check and so forth) Make it fun and educational.

I envision cadets waliking up to their IP, saluting and reporting ready to fly sir.
This is what I'm talking about when I say don't make it more disciplined.  Again, if cadets want to experience SUPT, they need to go to SUPTFC.

QuoteI ddn't say extremely disciplined. I didn't even say AS disciplined as what's expected of them every other day of their CAP career. By no means would I want to create a weeding out process, which is by the way not what occurs at primary now. The couple items suggested are far less than what they do every single meeting night, and are designed to reinforce the learning environment.

Opening/closing formation? I think that already happens in a briefing room. Some GLPs to reinforce things like situational awareness & attention to detail... reporting in & out to the IP, which formalizes the times in which they are under the command of that IP versus the school commander... and the IPs getting together at the end of the day to discuss the progress of their students & maybe get advice form another instructor or at least let them know how thigns are going. None of that is remotely challenging for any cadet, and remember these cadets will have been in CAP for a while. They'll be inpired by something that makes it seem a little like military flight training, even if it isn't.
I'm 99.9% sure we're on the same page.  That kind of discipline is characteristic of the one I went to and others that I've heard about.  I see nothing wrong with that, but it's a far cry from a SUPT environment.  I just caught what you said about making it more military disciplined in response to a suggestion for SUPT style training and wanted to jump in with my two cents.

QuoteStrategically though, the reason that we do this training is to improve the people going thru the training & the people they touch because of it, not the technical skill they learn while there. Kids don't understand why they learn drill or why they have to wear their uniform right. I mean if their nametape is sewn on wrong, that isn't going to stop them from finding a crashed plane right? But the attention to detail learned thru simple & sometimes meaningless tasks translates to attention to detail being second nature on not so simple tasks when people's lives & safety depend on it. I think above most anything else we could do with these folks that demonstrating the tie in between those skills learned in previous military training & the flight training they are going thru is huge. that makes them better cadets & better people who then come back & reinforce those points to junior cadets who are still trying to figure out why anyone cares if their uniform looks right or not.

I think if you can do a couple little things here & there to connect those dots for them while experinecing this stepping stone of flight training that you can do a great service to the cadet program & to the individuals lucky enough to attend one of these activities.
That's corollary to all training that cadets receive, but the NFA program in a vacuum is one dedicated to giving cadets a leap forward in their endeavour to becoming pilots.
Lt Col, CAP

flyguy06

I wouldnt want to create a weeding out process either but on that same note, lets be honest everyone that WANTS to be a pilot is NOT cut out to be a pilot. dcpacemaekr, are you suggesting a program where we coddle to the cadets and make them feel comfortable and let them solo even if they arent uo to par? What CFI is going to sign off on that?

I say yes make it military. CAP is a miitary organization isnt it? I dont mean exactly like UPT cause those young LT's are gettin gpaid for one thing. But make the course challeneging. and give them a taste of what UPT is like. Whats wrong withthat? Yes, I know that ATCFC does. I went to it when I was a cadet. But you dont get to fly there. Encampmets are military why not Flight academies?

Pace

Quote from: flyguy06 on February 12, 2007, 01:34:36 AM
I wouldnt want to create a weeding out process either but on that same note, lets be honest everyone that WANTS to be a pilot is NOT cut out to be a pilot. dcpacemaekr, are you suggesting a program where we coddle to the cadets and make them feel comfortable and let them solo even if they arent uo to par? What CFI is going to sign off on that?
No, I'm not suggesting coddling anyone.  I'm stating that it's fine just like it is.  It's hard enough for most people to come in with limited aviation knowledge and solo in 7 days.  It's challenging enough on that level alone.  And if they're not on par, the CFI isn't going to endorse their medical or their logbook for solo flight.  If they endorse someone that isn't ready, the NFA environment isn't the problem, the CFI is the problem.

QuoteBut make the course challeneging.
It already is.

Quoteand give them a taste of what UPT is like.  Whats wrong withthat? Yes, I know that ATCFC does. I went to it when I was a cadet. But you dont get to fly there.
Actually you do.  I have .5 hours "logged" in the T-6 Texan II sim.  Plus everyone got to fly in (albeit, not pilot) the T-1.  That aside, the purpose of the NFA is not to give cadets a taste of SUPT.  Remember, not everyone going through NFA wants to be a military aviator.  If that is their goal, that's why SUPTFC exists.

QuoteEncampmets are military why not Flight academies?
NFAs aren't encampments.  There are also other National Cadet Special Activities that are not military oriented by your standards (although they are disciplined in their own way).
Lt Col, CAP

flyguy06

Ok Iwill yiled that I didnt know the NFA was a wek. I thought it was two. That is  a little more challenging, but I didnt say make it like UPT. But put some military in it. CAP is a military type organization so every program wheather it be an encampment, NCSA or eekly meeting should have aspect of military leadership in it. Cadets still need to learn leadership.

I am talking about things like stand ups, having a cadet responsible for the group. You may already do that I have never been to a NFA which is why I originally asked the question.  I am not knocking it. I am just making some suggestions

DNall

Quote from: dcpacemaker on February 12, 2007, 01:10:38 AM
I'm 99.9% sure we're on the same page.  That kind of discipline is characteristic of the one I went to and others that I've heard about.  I see nothing wrong with that, but it's a far cry from a SUPT environment.  I just caught what you said about making it more military disciplined in response to a suggestion for SUPT style training and wanted to jump in with my two cents.
I at no point said anything like SUPT. I said there are elements of military flight training that can be mimicked at no cost or interference to improve dramatically the experience. Low time pilots, civilian or military, are a lot more accident prone, and that's mostly cause they're complacent & either never learned or have forgotten the importance of those life skills we teach at the pre-curry level. Connecting the dots for them causes the wealth of that prior knowledge they have to be brought to bear on their flight training psyche & that's good all around.

Quote
QuoteStrategically though, the reason that we do this training is to improve the people going thru the training & the people they touch because of it, not the technical skill they learn while there. Kids don't understand why they learn drill or why they have to wear their uniform right. I mean if their nametape is sewn on wrong, that isn't going to stop them from finding a crashed plane right? But the attention to detail learned thru simple & sometimes meaningless tasks translates to attention to detail being second nature on not so simple tasks when people's lives & safety depend on it. I think above most anything else we could do with these folks that demonstrating the tie in between those skills learned in previous military training & the flight training they are going thru is huge. that makes them better cadets & better people who then come back & reinforce those points to junior cadets who are still trying to figure out why anyone cares if their uniform looks right or not.

I think if you can do a couple little things here & there to connect those dots for them while experiencing this stepping stone of flight training that you can do a great service to the cadet program & to the individuals lucky enough to attend one of these activities.
That's corollary to all training that cadets receive, but the NFA program in a vacuum is one dedicated to giving cadets a leap forward in their endeavor to becoming pilots.
My point is it should NOT exist in a vacuum or be an objective in itself & unconnected to everything else. It should connect those dots or it should not be done at all.

eehite

Having initially soloed at an NFA and then later returned to teach the ground side, I can say with conviction that the program is where it needs to be in terms of military structure. The comfortable uniforms and more "academic" environment help participants focus on learning. I also endorse the first-name basis between students and instructors--it helps the students focus on good flying and less on formalities.

Jolt

I guess it would be like the difference between HMRS and NESA.

flyguy06

Quote from: eehite on February 12, 2007, 07:45:51 PM
Having initially soloed at an NFA and then later returned to teach the ground side, I can say with conviction that the program is where it needs to be in terms of military structure. The comfortable uniforms and more "academic" environment help participants focus on learning. I also endorse the first-name basis between students and instructors--it helps the students focus on good flying and less on formalities.

SO, you're telling me that Air Force student dont focus on learning because they have to say Capt so and so instead of using their first name? And these guys are flying jets not single engine props. I have to disagree with that. Wheather you call someone bytheir first name or a more formal approach will not make you learn better or less.

Actually at the flight camp I volunteer for, the students have call signs and are addresed by their indiviual call signs.

I like the idea that Texas has their own flight academy. Thats an idea.

flyguy06

Why is everyone on this board so anti-military?

Jolt

For the record, all of the senior members at NFA-G were addressed as sir or ma'am.  All of the students went by their first names exclusively.  I convinced a bunch of people I was a C/SrA for the week, mostly everyone except my friend from the same squadron and my room mates believed me.  That's how informal it was.

We did a formation at the beginning of every day in our activity uniforms and formed up and saluted as the flag was raised.  We never saluted except for the last day when we wore uniforms for the graduation.  We still used first names between cadets because we were almost all friends by that point.

I liked it just the way it was.

Pace

Quote from: flyguy06 on February 13, 2007, 03:31:48 AM
Why is everyone on this board so anti-military?
Not anti-military, just tired of change because one person or one sect wants change for change sake.  If it ain't broke (which it isn't), leave it alone.  The current environment is extremely conductive to learning the way it is.  And I can't seem to stress this enough: not everyone at NFA wants a glimpse into SUPT (if they did, guess where they'd go).  At least 3 of the cadets in my 2003 NFA class wanted to go corporate/airlines.  Yes, by all means, they can build on the skills they've learned so far in CAP, but the goal of the activity itself is to teach the cadet to solo an airplane or a glider.  That goal is being accomplished each year in a very effective and efficient manner.

QuoteFor the record, all of the senior members at NFA-G were addressed as sir or ma'am.  All of the students went by their first names exclusively.

We did a formation at the beginning of every day in our activity uniforms and formed up and saluted as the flag was raised.  We never saluted except for the last day when we wore uniforms for the graduation.  We still used first names between cadets because we were almost all friends by that point.
That was my experience as well, as it was the experience of many others at different NFAs in different years.  The current system works well and is highly enjoyable by all who attend.
Lt Col, CAP

flyguy06

Thats fine if they want to go corporate or airlines and there are programs out there for people with that interetst. But CAP is a military programand it should hold true to that goal. I am just saying teach leadership military customs at NFA. Its part of the cadet program. NFA is a cadet activity. So just incorporate it as much as you can thats all I am saying. We cant appease and accomadate everybody. We are a cade program that teaches military leadership. They know that when they join. They know that we wear uniforms, salute people and say sir and ma'am. That part of the program. They should know that comming into it.

I see the NFA as a way to further teach military leadership since that is one of the goals of the cadet program.

DNall

This thread is drifting off into stupid rather quickly...

Personally, I think a lot of the people involved w/ fligt academies may be a bit too close to the situation. We don't let kids fly for flying sake, & we don't do it to help them get their pilot's license. Those are bonus, a nice bonus that everyone thinks is great, but don't get caught up in it. This is what we do:
Quote from: CAPR 52-161-1. The Cadet Program's Mission & Goals. The mission of the Civil Air Patrol Cadet Program is to provide the youth of our nation with a quality program that enhances their leadership skills through an interest in aviation, and simultaneously provide service to the United States Air Force and the local community.

The only two reasons flight training is provided is as an incentive to make cadets do things they don't like (but that make them better) in order to earn it, and to highlight the parallels between flight & their military training so that they can come back & teach those lessons to other cadets. If it's not accomplishing both those things then it should not be happening. No one is talking change for the sake of change. People are talking about tweaking programs to better achieve the stated objectives, and about stepping back & getting perspective on what we're doing & why.


moose53

it sounds like things have changed quite a bit since I ran some wing and region flight activities.   We always did ours in a military manner, to maintain a sense of discipline and for safety. By that I don't mean exactly like UPT or even as much as a squadron meeting night, but the instructors were addressed as "Sir" or " Cpt soandso" and the cadets were "Mr. Jones" etc. All participants were issued flight suits which were the uniform of the day, and activity ball caps. We did "stand-ups", and had cadet flight leaders to move their flights between areas in a military manner. All my flight activities were held on military bases btw, and we lived, flew, ate, and slept there for the duration of the activity. The stress level from this was not high, although I think the flying was stressful for them at first. The low level of discipline was just enough to keep them focused on the activity, and not sidetracked into playing around. I ran five annual activities (called solo schools at the time) and trained 20 cadets in each one. We never had a student that didn't solo, and never had a single safety incident either. I guess my point is that while I realize there is more than one way of doing things, there is nothing wrong with emulating the parts of the AF program that can apply. it is, after all the air force auxilliary.