Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 22, 2017, 05:28:09 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: What airplanes would you like to see added to CAP?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2  All Print
Author Topic: What airplanes would you like to see added to CAP?  (Read 2240 times)
jfkspotting
Member

Posts: 93
Unit: NER-NY-328

Instagram Acct:
« on: September 30, 2017, 10:59:37 PM »

Personally, some Cessna 207's would be my choice, as they would add even more seats and room for cargo.
Logged
Mission/Tow Pilot
Seasoned Member

Posts: 414

« Reply #1 on: October 01, 2017, 01:10:44 PM »

The AirCam for low and slow and the Tecnam P2006T for twin-engine high-Wing searching and transport
Logged
Briank
Member

Posts: 60
Unit: GLR-OH-064

« Reply #2 on: October 01, 2017, 04:01:39 PM »

I'd like to see the Tecnam P2006T as well.  It sounds like there's more possibilities of us doing missions over water, and here the water goes much beyond reasonably glide distance at the altitudes we fly...  Twins are not a cure-all obviously, but for specific cases like that...
Logged
jeders
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,006

« Reply #3 on: October 01, 2017, 05:37:13 PM »

The Tecnam is definitely a good platform to look at, both the 2006 and the 2010. I've always felt though that we should have gotten Vulcan P68 Observers instead of the Airvans. Of course I highly doubt that we'll ever see many twin engine aircraft in CAP.
Logged

If you are confident in you abilities and experience, whether someone else is impressed is irrelevant. - Eclipse
zippy
Recruit

Posts: 38

« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2017, 01:04:12 PM »

A few small cargo plans that would be sent around the country for training. When there is an emergency there would be trained crews that could use rentals and the few trainers. It could also be used to bring reservists to summer training, etc.

I got the idea from an aviation organization called Agape Flights that runs cargo in emergencies. See this link to see the planes they use. http://www.agapeflights.com/about-agape-flights/about-the-embraer-110/
Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 853

« Reply #5 on: November 04, 2017, 08:00:56 PM »

More seats?  Thats why we have such a large van fleet.

Cargo?  The planes mentioned above are still minimally better for disaster relief cargo. Leave that to C-5s and similar.

Want new planes? You will have to do some very in depth studies first. Researching all our clients (FEMA, etc.) and get them to indicate what they would be interested in, before you can approach the Air Force with a request.
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
civil air patrol king
Newbie

Posts: 4
Unit: PCR-OR-050

« Reply #6 on: November 05, 2017, 03:56:03 PM »

A Airbus A-380
Logged
Flying Pig
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,030

« Reply #7 on: November 05, 2017, 04:00:24 PM »

Partnavias seem to be enjoyed by CA Fish and Game and Fl Wildlife Commission (FWC) .  Similar types of flying done relative to CAP.
Logged
abdsp51
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,316
Unit: Classified

« Reply #8 on: November 05, 2017, 04:57:05 PM »

I'd like to see an updated version of the 337 (O-2) personally. 
Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,664
Unit: of issue

« Reply #9 on: November 05, 2017, 05:30:07 PM »

A twin-turbine Bandeirante is pretty much worthless for CAP.  Look at the cited organization: they have access to .. ONE.

Keeping members current on a plane that doesn't get much play and has very high maintenance and replacement costs doesn't make a whole ton of sense.

I mean, if we wanted to get into that space, go big or go home with the C-27J.  We did have some at D-M, but the Coasties got 'em.

 8)

Twin anything requires multi-engine instructors along with pilots with multi-engine ratings.

Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 853

« Reply #10 on: November 05, 2017, 06:16:06 PM »

And they would 'sit' too long. Few members, very few, could afford C-12 self-pay time in a twin.  I do not know what percentage of CAP flights are C-12, but without it, few planes would ever see that desired 200 hours per year.

Can't let a bigger single or twin just sit there. We would have to 'create excuses' to find funded flights. ("Hey a light bulb is out. Lets make a maintenance flight to that shop 100 miles away to change the bulb".) :)
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
JayT
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,322

« Reply #11 on: November 05, 2017, 07:27:53 PM »

Personally, some Cessna 207's would be my choice, as they would add even more seats and room for cargo.

What sort of cargo?
Logged
"Eagerness and thrill seeking in others' misery is psychologically corrosive, and is also rampant in EMS. It's a natural danger of the job. It will be something to keep under control, something to fight against."
Flying Pig
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,030

« Reply #12 on: November 06, 2017, 07:37:46 AM »

Hundreds of hours flying in CAP and I never once hauled "cargo".  Unless you are talking about the barfing Scanner in the back seat.
Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,664
Unit: of issue

« Reply #13 on: November 06, 2017, 07:59:30 AM »

Hundreds of hours flying in CAP and I never once hauled "cargo".  Unless you are talking about the barfing Scanner in the back seat.
that's "self - loading cargo" and, one might hope, "self -cleaning"
Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
SarDragon
Global Moderator

Posts: 10,061
Unit: NAVAIRPAC

« Reply #14 on: November 06, 2017, 05:16:02 PM »

The only cargo I recall is a blood run a while back, and I think that "package" had an escort.
Logged
Dave Bowles
Maj, CAP
AT1, USN Retired
Mitchell Award (unnumbered)
C/WO, CAP, Ret
LSThiker
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,707
Unit: Earth

« Reply #15 on: November 06, 2017, 06:13:25 PM »

if we wanted to get into that space, go big or go home with the C-27J.

I thought you said go big?  The C-27 is not big.  I say we should go for the Super Guppy (at least).  Think about all the cargo and cadets we could transport in that.

Okay, so serious question.  Why does NASA hold onto the Super Guppy, when the Beluga was designed to replace the Super Guppy produced by Aero Spacelines?  Or even a 747-DreamLifter?
« Last Edit: November 06, 2017, 06:16:34 PM by LSThiker » Logged
NIN
VIP

Posts: 4,664
Unit: of issue

« Reply #16 on: November 06, 2017, 06:33:30 PM »

if we wanted to get into that space, go big or go home with the C-27J.

I thought you said go big?  The C-27 is not big.  I say we should go for the Super Guppy (at least).  Think about all the cargo and cadets we could transport in that.

Okay, so serious question.  Why does NASA hold onto the Super Guppy, when the Beluga was designed to replace the Super Guppy produced by Aero Spacelines?  Or even a 747-DreamLifter?
I will give you that the c-27 is not that big. However, I was trying to be somewhat realistic.

If you're going to go twin turbine you might as well get a little bit more bang for your buck than an EMB-110 or similar.

If I'm going to haul around cargo then I want to do it in something with a tailgate. Of course I have my own ulterior motives for wanting a tailgate.


Logged
Darin Ninness, Lt Col, CAP
Sq Bubba, Wing Dude, National Guy
I like to have Difficult Adult Conversations™
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by NIN. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.
LSThiker
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,707
Unit: Earth

« Reply #17 on: November 06, 2017, 06:54:12 PM »

I will give you that the c-27 is not that big. However, I was trying to be somewhat realistic.

Sorry, forgot my [sarcasm][/sarcasm] tags :)

Quote
If I'm going to haul around cargo then I want to do it in something with a tailgate. Of course I have my own ulterior motives for wanting a tailgate.

Hm would that be teaching cadets how to skydive?  Oh by the way, are you still skydiving?
Logged
Mitchell 1969
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 689
Unit: PCR-CA-051

« Reply #18 on: November 08, 2017, 02:58:53 AM »

Hundreds of hours flying in CAP and I never once hauled "cargo".  Unless you are talking about the barfing Scanner in the back seat.
that's "self - loading cargo" and, one might hope, "self -cleaning"

Actually, as described, that would be “self UN-loading cargo.”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
_________________
Bernard J. Wilson, Major, CAP

Mitchell 1969; Earhart 1971; Eaker 1973. Cadet Flying Encampment, License, 1970. IACE New Zealand 1971; IACE Korea 1973.

CAP has been bery, bery good to me.
dwr2829
Recruit

Posts: 7

« Reply #19 on: November 08, 2017, 02:52:34 PM »

OV-10
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: What airplanes would you like to see added to CAP?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.414 seconds with 20 queries.
click here to email me