CAP flying non-CAP kids

[RiverAux]

Most folks are aware of the EAA's "Young Eagles" program where members get together on certain days and take bunches of kids on short airplane rides.  Other pilot organizations do similar activities as well.

Isn't this the sort of thing that CAP should be doing? 

While I'm sure that those useless AF lawyers wouldn't let us do it as an AFAM, at a minimum it should be done as a corporate mission.  Not only would it help fulfill our too-often ignored AE mission, it would be a great cadet recruiting tool if we targeted the right age group.

Compare the difficulty in getting kids to come to a CAP meeting vs getting them to come to get a free airplane ride at an event CAP was sponsoring and where we could actively talk up CAP to them. 

By my reading of 60-1, this could actually be done now -- it would just require pre-approval of participating kids by the NOC and the completion of a form 9 by the kid.  Though you probably would want some sort of additional permission from the parents, for which a new form might be necessary. 

[flyerthom]

It would easier to do an MOU with EAA or squadron to local EAA chapter. Or End around it like they do here and have mission pilots in the EAA. Then all CAP needs is to take recruiting brochures along for the ride. The kid gets his/her ride and hears about CAP as an opportunity to fly more, glide more and contribute to his/her community.

[PHall]

We can't even give all of our current cadets their required orientation flights and you want to fly non-members?

[Eclipse]

Isn't this the sort of thing that CAP should be doing?

No.

[SJFedor]

Negative.

For one thing, our insurance underwriters would crap a chicken.

Second, imagine the enormously bad PR if one of our birds went down with a bunch of little non CAP kids. "Cadets killed in plane crash", although horrible, sounds better then "Local elementary school kids killed while flying in CAP aircraft"

Third, who's paying for it? I can barely get my members to do proficiency flying on their own dime, I doubt they're going to pay our wet rate per hour to fly non-CAP kids.

EAA flights and stuff like that, although, are great places to get cadets and be visible to the community. My old airport in PA used to do airport open houses a few times a year with airplane rides, and my unit always supported it, setting up a static display and a little booth, as well as assisting loading and unloading of passengers, since they wanted to do hot offloads and onloads to keep the line moving. Usually had 10-15 planes going, so it was real busy. Usually got a few out of every time, and definitely increased the public knowledge of who we were.

[RiverAux]

For one thing, our insurance underwriters would crap a chicken.

Possibly, but we already have mechanisms for taking non-CAP members up in CAP airplanes for all sorts of reasons, so to some extent I think this is already factored in.  Now, if we started flying thousands of non-CAP members in these events it probably would be a different story.

But, all our missions cost money to do, so paying a bit more in insurance premiums may be worth it for the AE that we're doing. 

Second, imagine the enormously bad PR if one of our birds went down with a bunch of little non CAP kids. "Cadets killed in plane crash", although horrible, sounds better then "Local elementary school kids killed while flying in CAP aircraft"

Yes, this is possible.   But we've got a pretty decent safety program and record.  You can't be afraid to do anything just because of the bad PR that might occur if something goes wrong. 

We can't even give all of our current cadets their required orientation flights and you want to fly non-members?

Different issues there.  Sometimes it is problems arranging for pilots and sometimes it is problems trying to get cadets to take the free o-rides they're entitled too.  There is a different thread on that issue.  Obviously, if your local unit can't get pilots enough to do o-rides, you're not a good candidate for this sort of program, but that isn't the problem everywhere. 

Third, who's paying for it? I can barely get my members to do proficiency flying on their own dime, I doubt they're going to pay our wet rate per hour to fly non-CAP kids.

It should be done as a corporate mission paid for by CAP.  I should point out that the other kid flying programs do it all on the pilot's dime and they don't seem to have any shortage of people wanting to do it. 

Now, whether or not these flights were ever done in CAP planes, I do agree that we should be partnering with EAA and any other similar program to at least do recruiting booths at the event.  However, this can be a bit tricky since sometime EAA and CAP don't always get along at the local level because they see each other as competition.  For example, EAA might not want to share the publicity associated with these events with CAP.  I personally see EAA and CAP as different enough that there isn't any natural overlaps between them. 

[SAR-EMT1]

For one thing, our insurance underwriters would crap a chicken.

This is my favorite quote of the day. 

[SJFedor]

It should be done as a corporate mission paid for by CAP.  I should point out that the other kid flying programs do it all on the pilot's dime and they don't seem to have any shortage of people wanting to do it. 

National wouldn't send their own funds down to do this. They'll do cheaper stuff like make pamphlets, and even mail them to you, but they're not going to shell out thousands upon thousands of dollars to fly people who *might* join. Good public image, bad corporate practice.

As for the ones that do it on the pilot's dime, those pilots, most (not all of the time) own their own aircraft. So, if they own their own aircraft, they probably have the dead presidents available to do it.

Possibly, but we already have mechanisms for taking non-CAP members up in CAP airplanes for all sorts of reasons, so to some extent I think this is already factored in.  Now, if we started flying thousands of non-CAP members in these events it probably would be a different story.

Kinda sorta. Except the things we have factored in are for people that have a higher business being in our aircraft then just a 8-18 year old going for a 25 minute hop around the patch. If you read 60-1, Section 2.6 (too much to post), you'll see a common theme: those currently allowed serve to advance the mission of CAP, mainly for ES and government relations type stuff. And you can see that even some of that takes some hoop jumping, depending on the type of person.

Personally, if our pilots have the time to fly kids not in CAP, I'd rather them take the time and fly those that ARE in CAP. Recruiting is no good if you're not retaining at all, right?

[Eclipse]

Actually, a bit of a re-think - young people of cadet age, I could see.  12-18 and they sign a slip that says that after the flight they agree to visit a unit meeting at least once within 30 days - maybe they give us a cash deposit for the cost of the flight - refundable when the come back - whatever.

I'd even go that far for seniors.

But random kids under 12 or over 18 are little to no value to the program, so why spend the money?

[RiverAux]

They'll do cheaper stuff like make pamphlets, and even mail them to you, but they're not going to shell out thousands upon thousands of dollars to fly people who *might* join. Good public image, bad corporate practice.

Personally, I would see this PRIMARILY as an aerospace education mission.  We spend millions of dollars on ES missions for which we see no monetary return.  Why should AE be any different?  You've got to spend money to accomplish your mission.

Now, if we happen to pick up a few cadets and get some great community public relations mileage out of it, thats great.  I would limit it to kids 12-18 to increase the chances of joining the organization -- after all, we don't have the money to fly everybody....

[A.Member]

Nope.   We shouldn't fly non-CAP kids.  There is plenty of AE that can occur without actually flying.  The o-flights are a perk for cadets and should remain as such. 

[SJFedor]

Personally, I would see this PRIMARILY as an aerospace education mission.  We spend millions of dollars on ES missions for which we see no monetary return.  Why should AE be any different?  You've got to spend money to accomplish your mission.

CAP doesn't spend millions of anything on ES. The AF, via taxpayers, pays for the bulk of our ES operations. The rest are paid for by contracts that we have with other federal, state, and local agencies that request our support. NHQ does not directly finance any ES operational missions. They use their appropriated funds to pay for toys, but, with very rare exceptions, they never pay for our actual operations.

If they want to fly in the pretty red white and blue plane, they need to join. Regulations say so, and honestly, if they're interested, they should pursue it farther then taking a 20 min flight with one of our pilots. Show up at a meeting, if it's what you like, join up, and you'll get to fly. If not, no biggie, but flying non CAP kids for "educational" purposes is going to be a huge loss, and the return on it, via membership, would probably be negligable at best.

[RiverAux]

My point was not so much who ultimately paid for ES missions, but that we don't see it as a problem to really spend money on one of our missions. 

[SJFedor]

My point was not so much who ultimately paid for ES missions, but that we don't see it as a problem to really spend money on one of our missions. 

Apples and oranges, my friend. Congress chartered us with one of our missions as ES, and appropriates the funds to the AF for us to complete that mission. They did also charter us with AE, however, they're not shelling out the dead presidents required to do what you're thinking of.

Write to your congressman, maybe they'll add more cookies to the jar, and appropriate funds to us for this purpose.

[jimmydeanno]

Write to your congressman, maybe they'll add more cookies to the jar, and appropriate funds to us for this purpose.

...or they'll go, "Why are we still paying for this?" 

[Cadet Tillett]

Actually, a bit of a re-think - young people of cadet age, I could see.  12-18 and they sign a slip that says that after the flight they agree to visit a unit meeting at least once within 30 days - maybe they give us a cash deposit for the cost of the flight - refundable when the come back - whatever.

I'd even go that far for seniors.

But random kids under 12 or over 18 are little to no value to the program, so why spend the money?

Sounds way too complicated to me. But then, I always did favor the simple solution.(don't fly them, don't fly them  )

[flyguy06]

I think its a great idea. Not neccessarily with EAA though, but any youths. I work with youths inthe inner city and they are not exposed to aviation. it would great if I could take them up in a CAP aircraft. Iwouldnt even care about reimbursment. I would pay for it myself or get sponsors in the community.

[SJFedor]

I think its a great idea. Not neccessarily with EAA though, but any youths. I work with youths inthe inner city and they are not exposed to aviation. it would great if I could take them up in a CAP aircraft. Iwouldnt even care about reimbursment. I would pay for it myself or get sponsors in the community.

No doubt you've heard of the middle school initiative, right? PA actually started a charter school (this year? Colgan help me out) in Philadelphia, along with their multiple MSI squadrons, and it's actually been very sucessful. Before I moved down to TN, I had a chance to interface with about 10 of the kids from one of the MSI units while I was at PNE. Great bunch of kids, and they were all so thrilled to fly (first o-flights). If we could get more cities to buy into the program, it won't work for all, but we could do a ton of good with some. 

[Cadet Tillett]

I think its a great idea. Not neccessarily with EAA though, but any youths. I work with youths inthe inner city and they are not exposed to aviation. it would great if I could take them up in a CAP aircraft. Iwouldnt even care about reimbursment. I would pay for it myself or get sponsors in the community.

No doubt you've heard of the middle school initiative, right? PA actually started a charter school (this year? Colgan help me out) in Philadelphia, along with their multiple MSI squadrons, and it's actually been very sucessful. Before I moved down to TN, I had a chance to interface with about 10 of the kids from one of the MSI units while I was at PNE. Great bunch of kids, and they were all so thrilled to fly (first o-flights). If we could get more cities to buy into the program, it won't work for all, but we could do a ton of good with some. 

Slightly off topic, but my squadron is number 800, the first MSI unit in the nation.  It is a really good program with a lot of potential.

[floridacyclist]

On a more realistic note, partner up with EAA to help with the Young Eagles flights. Assist with running the booth, marshalling the aircraft, signing kids up, crowd control, making sure the little ones stay hydrated while they wait etc etc etc...and make sure there's a big stack of recruiting flyers next to the sign-up desk and another stack when they get ready to leave.

Sure it might be a long-term investment, but it's also not always about recruiting - sometimes just making them aware of who we are is worthwhile as well.

In the public's mind, they will see you working hand-in-hand with EAA and make the connection on their own as to who is helping fly kids.