Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
November 20, 2017, 05:29:57 AM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: Will Cap ever buy c152's?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: 1 2 [All] Print
Author Topic: Will Cap ever buy c152's?  (Read 4223 times)
jfkspotting
Member

Posts: 93
Unit: NER-NY-328

Instagram Acct:
« on: October 02, 2017, 10:05:44 PM »

Maybe second hand ones for soloing cadets?
Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 850

« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2017, 10:10:05 PM »

Maybe second hand ones for soloing cadets?

I sure don't see that happening. We have C-172s that do not get flown enough. Plenty of time on the schedules for Cadet training. No need for 'singular use' airplanes, that might not could be used even then, due to W&B issues.
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,864

« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2017, 11:06:51 PM »

We used to have a few C-150's a long time ago. Sold because they became worthless for ES missions.
Cadet Flight Training is NOT a primary mission of CAP.
Logged
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,114

« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2017, 11:54:20 PM »

Cadet Flight Training is NOT a primary mission of CAP.

Perhaps it should be.
Logged
Nick
Seasoned Member

Posts: 473
Unit: SWR-TX-001

« Reply #4 on: October 03, 2017, 07:52:32 AM »

With respect to the 152s... you put 2 200 pound guys in the plane, youíre almost at max gross weight. It truly would be limited to being a trainer for a 100 pound cadet and an instructor.

And cadet flight training may not necessarily be a primary mission of CAP, but sure as hell is one of those that strongly threads between all three of them.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Logged
Nicholas McLarty, Lt Col, CAP
Texas Wing Staff Guy
National Cadet Team Guy
Panzerbjorn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 277
Unit: MER-NC-048

« Reply #5 on: October 03, 2017, 09:29:04 AM »

Cadet Flight Training is NOT a primary mission of CAP.

Perhaps it should be.

No, it really shouldnít.

1. You donít have nearly the number of Instructor Pilots required to support it being a primary mission.  Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets?  Thatís saying that CAP needs to provide cadets with a MINIMUM of 200,000 flight hours.  I donít have the stat of how many Instructor Pilots we have at my fingertips, but youíre talking being able to keep that pilot Flying and instructing as a full time job thatís busier than a pilot mill full of Chinese student pilots, and expect them to do it for free.

2. Itís been my experience in multiple wings and multiple squadrons that the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

3. You have O-rides that give the cadets a taste of powered flight and glider flight.

4. People here gripe and complain how we expect cadets to pay for a $4 patch for their uniform and how itís a financial burden this or that on the cadets.  Now you want to put the financial burden of flight training on cadets as a primary mission of CAP?

5. There is not a thing that you can teach in a 152 that you canít teach in a 172.  You donít buy a bulk number of aircraft in CAP to support a singular task.  The ARCHER program should be a good reminder of that.  The 172 is much more versatile for such things than the 152 could ever be.
Logged
Major
Command Pilot
Ground Branch Director
Eagle Scout
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,864

« Reply #6 on: October 03, 2017, 09:53:00 AM »

Cadet Flight Training is NOT a primary mission of CAP.

Perhaps it should be.

No, it really shouldnít.

1. You donít have nearly the number of Instructor Pilots required to support it being a primary mission.  Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets?  Thatís saying that CAP needs to provide cadets with a MINIMUM of 200,000 flight hours.  I donít have the stat of how many Instructor Pilots we have at my fingertips, but youíre talking being able to keep that pilot Flying and instructing as a full time job thatís busier than a pilot mill full of Chinese student pilots, and expect them to do it for free.

2. Itís been my experience in multiple wings and multiple squadrons that the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

3. You have O-rides that give the cadets a taste of powered flight and glider flight.

4. People here gripe and complain how we expect cadets to pay for a $4 patch for their uniform and how itís a financial burden this or that on the cadets.  Now you want to put the financial burden of flight training on cadets as a primary mission of CAP?

5. There is not a thing that you can teach in a 152 that you canít teach in a 172.  You donít buy a bulk number of aircraft in CAP to support a singular task.  The ARCHER program should be a good reminder of that.  The 172 is much more versatile for such things than the 152 could ever be.


C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.
Logged
Panzerbjorn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 277
Unit: MER-NC-048

« Reply #7 on: October 03, 2017, 10:41:36 AM »

C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.

All aircraft have limitations.  This is why thereís always pleading to put the turbo charged stuff in the fleet out west in the mountains instead of on the east coast where itís not quite so crucial.  But the 172 is still more versatile than a 152.  Not their forte does not necessarily equate to incapable.

If youíre talking about cadet solos and flight training, are you really going to put a cadet in a 182 for their first solo?  You canít. 60-1 requires you to have 100 hours total time to fly a high performance airplane.  A cadet doing their first solo has between 10-20.
Logged
Major
Command Pilot
Ground Branch Director
Eagle Scout
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,138

« Reply #8 on: October 03, 2017, 11:22:19 AM »

There is a reason Cessna no longer manufactures the C-152 (or C-162).  There is no longer a market for them.  The cost differential for manufacturing them is minimal, and the C-172 makes for an excellent training platform; plus, as said above, the C-172 is more versatile. 
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,864

« Reply #9 on: October 03, 2017, 11:58:38 AM »

C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.

All aircraft have limitations.  This is why thereís always pleading to put the turbo charged stuff in the fleet out west in the mountains instead of on the east coast where itís not quite so crucial.  But the 172 is still more versatile than a 152.  Not their forte does not necessarily equate to incapable.

If youíre talking about cadet solos and flight training, are you really going to put a cadet in a 182 for their first solo?  You canít. 60-1 requires you to have 100 hours total time to fly a high performance airplane.  A cadet doing their first solo has between 10-20.

Have seen people get their Private in a C-182, not a big deal. And a cadet soloing in a C-182? Well if all of their training has been in a C-182 should be no problem.
It's what they're used to.
Logged
Blanding
Recruit

Posts: 21
Unit: MER-VA-102

« Reply #10 on: October 03, 2017, 12:05:11 PM »

Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets? 

2. ...the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

So... not 25,000 (the actual number of cadets).

Isn't the argument that even one more certified pilot is a success? Why would it be in the organization's interest to stop cadets from flight training? It seemed like the original point was that CAP should care about certifying pilots because that serves all three missions of our organization, not that every flight instructor should be expected to train every cadet (and then some).
Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,138

« Reply #11 on: October 03, 2017, 01:08:26 PM »

Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets? 

2. ...the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

Isn't the argument that even one more certified pilot is a success? Why would it be in the organization's interest to stop cadets from flight training? It seemed like the original point was that CAP should care about certifying pilots because that serves all three missions of our organization, not that every flight instructor should be expected to train every cadet (and then some).

It would be in CAP's interest to fly the aircraft they already have.  The only "restrictions" for cadet flight training is availability of IPs willing to train cadets.  We have ample aircraft; not the personnel.  Flight training is a adjunct to the cadet program. No one willingly discourages it.
Logged
Blanding
Recruit

Posts: 21
Unit: MER-VA-102

« Reply #12 on: October 03, 2017, 01:19:37 PM »

It would be in CAP's interest to fly the aircraft they already have...Flight training is a adjunct to the cadet program. No one willingly discourages it.

I don't think we're arguing that flight training is an opportunity; my opinion is that it should be given higher priority than "it exists" - especially considering reported pilot shortages, etc.

The discouragement I was responding to was:

Cadet Flight Training is NOT a primary mission of CAP.

Perhaps it should be.

No, it really shouldnít.

Logged
Ned
Resident Philosopher

Posts: 2,118

« Reply #13 on: October 03, 2017, 02:18:12 PM »


I don't think we're arguing that flight training is an opportunity; my opinion is that it should be given higher priority than "it exists" - especially considering reported pilot shortages, etc.



Well then, we have some exciting news coming out from NHQ shortly concerning flight training and cadets.  You will be pleased.

Stand by for news!

[/teaser]


Ned Lee
Col, CAP
National Cadet Program Manager
Logged
Alaric
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 750

« Reply #14 on: October 03, 2017, 02:33:22 PM »

Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets? 

2. ...the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

So... not 25,000 (the actual number of cadets).

Isn't the argument that even one more certified pilot is a success? Why would it be in the organization's interest to stop cadets from flight training? It seemed like the original point was that CAP should care about certifying pilots because that serves all three missions of our organization, not that every flight instructor should be expected to train every cadet (and then some).

As usual though, Senior Members are out of luck since we are seen by the organization as mainly here to support the cadet program.
Logged
Panzerbjorn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 277
Unit: MER-NC-048

« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2017, 03:11:25 PM »

Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets? 

2. ...the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

So... not 25,000 (the actual number of cadets).

Isn't the argument that even one more certified pilot is a success? Why would it be in the organization's interest to stop cadets from flight training? It seemed like the original point was that CAP should care about certifying pilots because that serves all three missions of our organization, not that every flight instructor should be expected to train every cadet (and then some).

Whoops on the 25,000, I concede that.  I also did my math wrong on the flight hours.  Weíre talking 1,000,000 flight hours minimum to take 25,000 cadets to their Private certificates.  No one said stop cadets from flight training.  The program is already set up to allow that.  Iíve taken two all the way to their Private certificates, though after they soloed and outside of CAP.  Oneís certificate was completely taken care of financially from a CAP flight academy scholarship.  The other wanted it on his own accord.  But to strongly encourage that CAP give flight training to cadets the same way we Ďstrongly encourageí to get cadets Flying their first O-flight within 60 days of joining.  Itís rough enough to fit in those 125,000 flight hours for O-Flights.

I donít argue that flight training should be available to cadets.  I just argue that it shouldnít be a primary mission of CAP.
Logged
Major
Command Pilot
Ground Branch Director
Eagle Scout
Panzerbjorn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 277
Unit: MER-NC-048

« Reply #16 on: October 03, 2017, 03:14:13 PM »

C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.

All aircraft have limitations.  This is why thereís always pleading to put the turbo charged stuff in the fleet out west in the mountains instead of on the east coast where itís not quite so crucial.  But the 172 is still more versatile than a 152.  Not their forte does not necessarily equate to incapable.

If youíre talking about cadet solos and flight training, are you really going to put a cadet in a 182 for their first solo?  You canít. 60-1 requires you to have 100 hours total time to fly a high performance airplane.  A cadet doing their first solo has between 10-20.

Have seen people get their Private in a C-182, not a big deal. And a cadet soloing in a C-182? Well if all of their training has been in a C-182 should be no problem.
It's what they're used to.

Sure.....if they have 100 hours of total time by the time they actually solo the 182.  But are you really going to accumulate 100 hours of total time pre-solo Just so you can do primary flight training in a CAP 182?
Logged
Major
Command Pilot
Ground Branch Director
Eagle Scout
Panzerbjorn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 277
Unit: MER-NC-048

« Reply #17 on: October 03, 2017, 03:25:21 PM »

Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets? 

2. ...the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

So... not 25,000 (the actual number of cadets).

Isn't the argument that even one more certified pilot is a success? Why would it be in the organization's interest to stop cadets from flight training? It seemed like the original point was that CAP should care about certifying pilots because that serves all three missions of our organization, not that every flight instructor should be expected to train every cadet (and then some).

As usual though, Senior Members are out of luck since we are seen by the organization as mainly here to support the cadet program.

I think it has more to do with investing the time and resources to a Senior Member who is looking for cheap flight instruction and training, then cancelling their membership.  Mission Pilots can pursue any advanced rating they want to in CAP aircraft, and non-Mission Pilots can do it with Wing CC approval.
Logged
Major
Command Pilot
Ground Branch Director
Eagle Scout
Alaric
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 750

« Reply #18 on: October 03, 2017, 03:36:49 PM »

Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets? 

2. ...the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

So... not 25,000 (the actual number of cadets).

Isn't the argument that even one more certified pilot is a success? Why would it be in the organization's interest to stop cadets from flight training? It seemed like the original point was that CAP should care about certifying pilots because that serves all three missions of our organization, not that every flight instructor should be expected to train every cadet (and then some).

As usual though, Senior Members are out of luck since we are seen by the organization as mainly here to support the cadet program.

I think it has more to do with investing the time and resources to a Senior Member who is looking for cheap flight instruction and training, then cancelling their membership.  Mission Pilots can pursue any advanced rating they want to in CAP aircraft, and non-Mission Pilots can do it with Wing CC approval.

I disagree, that problem could easily be solved with an agreement much as employers have that do tuition reimbursement.  It is ludicrous that we are happy to train a 16 year old to be a pilot, but a 22 year old who never had the opportunity to join CAP, sorry buddy you'll have to do it on your own time and dime.  Like I said by and large whenever opportunities come out from National its about the cadets, Seniors are seen as support and wallets
Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,864

« Reply #19 on: October 03, 2017, 03:44:16 PM »

C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.

All aircraft have limitations.  This is why thereís always pleading to put the turbo charged stuff in the fleet out west in the mountains instead of on the east coast where itís not quite so crucial.  But the 172 is still more versatile than a 152.  Not their forte does not necessarily equate to incapable.

If youíre talking about cadet solos and flight training, are you really going to put a cadet in a 182 for their first solo?  You canít. 60-1 requires you to have 100 hours total time to fly a high performance airplane.  A cadet doing their first solo has between 10-20.

Have seen people get their Private in a C-182, not a big deal. And a cadet soloing in a C-182? Well if all of their training has been in a C-182 should be no problem.
It's what they're used to.

Sure.....if they have 100 hours of total time by the time they actually solo the 182.  But are you really going to accumulate 100 hours of total time pre-solo Just so you can do primary flight training in a CAP 182?

Who said anything about a CAP C-182? I know I didn't.
Logged
Briank
Member

Posts: 60
Unit: GLR-OH-064

« Reply #20 on: October 03, 2017, 06:00:54 PM »

C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.

Marginally useful...  The older ones weren't too bad, but the new ones are so fat that while they're still usable for flight training, they're not terribly useful for missions/other training.  W&B only gives you 2 standard adults plus fuel in a modern 172 unfortunately.
Logged
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,114

« Reply #21 on: October 03, 2017, 06:41:26 PM »

Whoops on the 25,000, I concede that.  I also did my math wrong on the flight hours.  Weíre talking 1,000,000 flight hours minimum to take 25,000 cadets to their Private certificates.  No one said stop cadets from flight training.  The program is already set up to allow that.  Iíve taken two all the way to their Private certificates, though after they soloed and outside of CAP.  Oneís certificate was completely taken care of financially from a CAP flight academy scholarship.  The other wanted it on his own accord.  But to strongly encourage that CAP give flight training to cadets the same way we Ďstrongly encourageí to get cadets Flying their first O-flight within 60 days of joining.  Itís rough enough to fit in those 125,000 flight hours for O-Flights.

I donít argue that flight training should be available to cadets.  I just argue that it shouldnít be a primary mission of CAP.

Yeah you're still overstating it a bit...
How many of those 25,000 are reasonably eligible for flight training by age,
and perhaps by other criteria
and the fact that not all of them who are eligible will particularly even WANT that,
or be able to afford it.

but yes, having enough instructors to cover demand is most definitely an issue.

Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 850

« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2017, 06:46:07 PM »

C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.

Marginally useful...  The older ones weren't too bad, but the new ones are so fat that while they're still usable for flight training, they're not terribly useful for missions/other training.  W&B only gives you 2 standard adults plus fuel in a modern 172 unfortunately.

I guess we are the oddballs. We have a practically new (2015) C-172 G1000, and this past summer Wing offered to trade it for a brand new C-182 G1000 ... if we wanted it.  After some deliberation we decided to keep the 172. Taking off with just 40 gallons onboard allows any of our 3 person crews to fit within W&B, and still be able to fly a 3 hour mission and landing with the hour reserve. Its been a fine aircraft for all of our missions and performed well at SAREXs, etc. And the big point ... we currently have 3 Cadets taking primary training. Swapping to the C-182 would most likely have killed that. And the higher rate and more fuel may have hurt Senior member C-12 flights as well.  It all worked out for the best.
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
stillamarine
400,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 803
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2017, 06:49:30 PM »

Can you imagine telling all the Instructor pilots that they are expected to provide uncompensated flight instruction to a Rating for 50,000+ cadets? 

2. ...the number of cadets whose primary goal is to obtain their Private Pilot certificate is in the minority, not majority.

So... not 25,000 (the actual number of cadets).

Isn't the argument that even one more certified pilot is a success? Why would it be in the organization's interest to stop cadets from flight training? It seemed like the original point was that CAP should care about certifying pilots because that serves all three missions of our organization, not that every flight instructor should be expected to train every cadet (and then some).

As usual though, Senior Members are out of luck since we are seen by the organization as mainly here to support the cadet program.

I think it has more to do with investing the time and resources to a Senior Member who is looking for cheap flight instruction and training, then cancelling their membership.  Mission Pilots can pursue any advanced rating they want to in CAP aircraft, and non-Mission Pilots can do it with Wing CC approval.

Ok so what about a member with over 10 years as a SM plus cadet time? There is one place near me to do flight training that is not a part of a college. It is at an international airport so I can probably plan on tacking on a few extra grand because of the time it takes to get airborne and to a training area. I'm not going to go to the college because just to do my PPL I have to enroll in the college and take a bunch of classes I don't need so add some more costs and time. I'm a PhD candidate. My classroom time is otherwise taken. But my squadron has an aircraft and is stationed at the same airport as the college's aircraft. There are IPs from the college that are squadron members.

Everybody keeps talking about we are short pilots but there are SMs that would love to fly.
Logged
Tim Gardiner, 1st LT, CAP

USMC AD 1996-2001
USMCR    2001-2005  Admiral, Great State of Nebraska Navy  MS, MO, UDF
tim.gardiner@gmail.com
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,114

« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2017, 07:02:31 PM »

Ok so what about a member with over 10 years as a SM plus cadet time?
Everybody keeps talking about we are short pilots but there are SMs that would love to fly.

What about cadets who turn 21 in the middle of their flight training?

Keep making the argument, but it has been shut down continuously over time.
For initial PPL at least.

The argument usually circles around not competing with local flying schools and their paid instructors.
I'm not sure why that wouldn't apply to cadets too, though...
Logged
stillamarine
400,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 803
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #25 on: October 03, 2017, 07:11:10 PM »

Meh, my point was from the argument someone mid about people joining only to get their ppl then leave. For what it's worth I think cadets who turn 21 who aren't finish should be able to finish. Also I'm not talking about free lessons for SM. I'll gladly pay for the aircraft and the instructor. The issue for me is flying a CAP aircraft is more accessible to me as well as an IP that is a squadron member.
Logged
Tim Gardiner, 1st LT, CAP

USMC AD 1996-2001
USMCR    2001-2005  Admiral, Great State of Nebraska Navy  MS, MO, UDF
tim.gardiner@gmail.com
Panzerbjorn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 277
Unit: MER-NC-048

« Reply #26 on: October 03, 2017, 11:13:29 PM »

C-172's are useful east of the Rockies. Pretty much worthless in the mountains and deserts. High and hot is NOT their forte'.

All aircraft have limitations.  This is why thereís always pleading to put the turbo charged stuff in the fleet out west in the mountains instead of on the east coast where itís not quite so crucial.  But the 172 is still more versatile than a 152.  Not their forte does not necessarily equate to incapable.

If youíre talking about cadet solos and flight training, are you really going to put a cadet in a 182 for their first solo?  You canít. 60-1 requires you to have 100 hours total time to fly a high performance airplane.  A cadet doing their first solo has between 10-20.

Have seen people get their Private in a C-182, not a big deal. And a cadet soloing in a C-182? Well if all of their training has been in a C-182 should be no problem.
It's what they're used to.

Sure.....if they have 100 hours of total time by the time they actually solo the 182.  But are you really going to accumulate 100 hours of total time pre-solo Just so you can do primary flight training in a CAP 182?

Who said anything about a CAP C-182? I know I didn't.

How silly of me to think that when you were talking about CADETS soloing a C-182, the discussion being about giving cadets primary flight training, and not being able to think of a single flight school or Flying club that uses a C-182 as a primary trainer that you were talking about using CAP airplanes.

Though there ARE provisions in 60-1 for a cadet to receive primary flight training in a CAP 182.  It requires Wing CC approval for the cadet to train in a SPECIFIC 182 with a SPECIFIC instructor.
« Last Edit: October 03, 2017, 11:22:08 PM by Panzerbjorn » Logged
Major
Command Pilot
Ground Branch Director
Eagle Scout
N6RVT
Member

Posts: 66
Unit: PCR-CA-080

« Reply #27 on: October 04, 2017, 01:09:35 PM »

Maybe second hand ones for soloing cadets?

I'm surprised nobody made the simple point that the 152 is out of production and CAP does not buy used aircraft.
Logged
Dwight J. Dutton, CAPT CAP
Mitchell 1975 (before numbers)
THRAWN
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,809

« Reply #28 on: October 04, 2017, 03:39:24 PM »

Maybe second hand ones for soloing cadets?

I'm surprised nobody made the simple point that the 152 is out of production and CAP does not buy used aircraft.

FW did early on in the discussion.
Logged
Strup
"Belligerent....at times...."
AFRCC SMC 10-97
NSS ISC 05-00
USAF SOS 2000
USAF ACSC 2011
US NWC 2016
Briank
Member

Posts: 60
Unit: GLR-OH-064

« Reply #29 on: October 04, 2017, 09:02:35 PM »

Everybody keeps talking about we are short pilots but there are SMs that would love to fly.

It's really funny to hear about not having enough pilots and airplanes sitting around unused.  Transfer the planes over to us!  We've got pilots sitting around not being able to fly as we don't have airplanes nearby in our Wing.  The nearest one (in another Wing) is getting so many hours that it's going in for 100 hour inspections almost constantly it seems).  If you've got airplanes and no pilots, release those airplanes, we need them elsewhere!
Logged
stillamarine
400,000th Post Author
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 803
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #30 on: October 04, 2017, 09:22:19 PM »

Everybody keeps talking about we are short pilots but there are SMs that would love to fly.

It's really funny to hear about not having enough pilots and airplanes sitting around unused.  Transfer the planes over to us!  We've got pilots sitting around not being able to fly as we don't have airplanes nearby in our Wing.  The nearest one (in another Wing) is getting so many hours that it's going in for 100 hour inspections almost constantly it seems).  If you've got airplanes and no pilots, release those airplanes, we need them elsewhere!

Depends on where your at. I belonged to a squadron that had two aircraft assigned (for all intents and purposes 3 because another aircraft from the Group was the next town over). They flew a minimum of once daily on an AFAM and sometimes twice. Having looked at the slides from the National Conference it looks like most wings aren't getting their hours in. The wings should be evaluating where aircraft are at and how they can better utilize them.
Logged
Tim Gardiner, 1st LT, CAP

USMC AD 1996-2001
USMCR    2001-2005  Admiral, Great State of Nebraska Navy  MS, MO, UDF
tim.gardiner@gmail.com
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 850

« Reply #31 on: October 04, 2017, 10:42:31 PM »


 The wings should be evaluating where aircraft are at and how they can better utilize them.

One point they should consider is how many Cadet O'rides a plane gives each year. I would dare to say that a majority of planes are not being used for this nearly enough.

As an aside, but related, a kid who joins at 12 and only gets 4 rides in up to 10 years is rediculous in my view. We should be flying these kids at least twice a year to get them fired up about aviation.
Logged
MS - MO - AP - MP
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,864

« Reply #32 on: October 04, 2017, 11:04:37 PM »


 The wings should be evaluating where aircraft are at and how they can better utilize them.

One point they should consider is how many Cadet O'rides a plane gives each year. I would dare to say that a majority of planes are not being used for this nearly enough.

As an aside, but related, a kid who joins at 12 and only gets 4 rides in up to 10 years is rediculous in my view. We should be flying these kids at least twice a year to get them fired up about aviation.

Sure, just get your fellow pilots to jump through all of the hoops needed to become O-Ride Pilots. A fair amount of work that many pilots choose to avoid.
Becoming a Mission Pilot was enough fun for them.
Logged
Panzerbjorn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 277
Unit: MER-NC-048

« Reply #33 on: October 04, 2017, 11:48:22 PM »


 The wings should be evaluating where aircraft are at and how they can better utilize them.

One point they should consider is how many Cadet O'rides a plane gives each year. I would dare to say that a majority of planes are not being used for this nearly enough.

As an aside, but related, a kid who joins at 12 and only gets 4 rides in up to 10 years is rediculous in my view. We should be flying these kids at least twice a year to get them fired up about aviation.

Sure, just get your fellow pilots to jump through all of the hoops needed to become O-Ride Pilots. A fair amount of work that many pilots choose to avoid.
Becoming a Mission Pilot was enough fun for them.

If youíre a Mission Pilot, thereís no reason in the world why you shouldnít be an O-Ride pilot too.  Extra hoops?  Itís an extra thing you need to do on a Form5 Checkride.  You need to show you can teach a cadet something about Flying.  Oh, thereís an online quiz as well.  If youíre willing to do the work to become a Mission Pilot, becoming an O-Pilot is Just merely a formality after that.
Logged
Major
Command Pilot
Ground Branch Director
Eagle Scout
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,987

« Reply #34 on: October 05, 2017, 12:00:29 AM »

As an aside, but related, a kid who joins at 12 and only gets 4 rides in up to 10 years is rediculous in my view. We should be flying these kids at least twice a year to get them fired up about aviation.

While I agree in principle, you may want to have some discussions with your wing ops staff in regards to budgets
and MX issues.  Most wings are budgeted at about 30% of what they would need to have all cadets get two rides a year
(one power, one glider), that assumes that the cadets are interested, care enough to show up, and aren't weathered out.

There are a lot of Freakonomics-style factors that work against getting cadets in the air.

As to where the planes are, this is a legit issue, but one which is largely outside CAP's control unless they start
building airports. Just because a large concentration of members is located at "x", doesn't mean there is a place
to put a plane, nor pilots to fly it in proximity.
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
The contents of this post are Copyright © 2017 by eclipse. All rights are reserved. Specific permission is given to quote this post here on CAP-Talk only.

Pages: 1 2 [All] Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: Will Cap ever buy c152's?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.509 seconds with 20 queries.
click here to email me