Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 30, 2017, 06:32:49 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: CAP Use of Member Private Aircraft
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] Print
Author Topic: CAP Use of Member Private Aircraft  (Read 849 times)
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 550

« on: January 15, 2017, 06:11:19 PM »

Online survey for CAP pilots.

Quote
The CAP leadership is trying to determine how many of CAP's pilots currently own aircraft (powered, gliders, or balloons) or plan to purchase an aircraft in 2017, and if our members that are aircraft owners would be willing to use them for CAP missions, what they would consider a reasonable maintenance reimbursement rate per hour or launch.  This survey will remain active through the 23rd of January, 2017.

Wow!  Hmmmm.  So many thoughts one could get from this. That many people asking to use their planes, or is CAP getting a message from the AF that the number of planes they provide will be diminishing? Something else?
Logged
Mission/Tow Pilot
Seasoned Member

Posts: 405

« Reply #1 on: January 15, 2017, 06:27:35 PM »

Make work project?
Logged
nomiddlemas
Member

Posts: 75
Unit: NC-019

« Reply #2 on: January 15, 2017, 06:28:27 PM »

Wow
« Last Edit: January 15, 2017, 07:05:34 PM by nomiddlemas » Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,606

« Reply #3 on: January 15, 2017, 07:02:02 PM »

Wow don't this will happen. Just using random planes for a live sar mission called in my the Air Force. Interesting idea.

It's how we used to things prior to 1985.
Logged
dbaran
Member

Posts: 81
Unit: PCR-CA-110

« Reply #4 on: January 15, 2017, 07:46:00 PM »

I wonder if the reality of equipping > 500 planes with ADS-B is making them reconsider the current approach.
Logged
stillamarine
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 729
Unit: SER-AL-134

« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2017, 08:14:22 PM »

If I owned a plane or a pilot I would use mine if it was covered by CAP insurance during missions. I would think I would be more comfortable with a plane I use more often.
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
Spam
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 803
Unit: GA-001/CV

« Reply #6 on: January 15, 2017, 09:08:55 PM »

I flew missions, reimbursed, in member owned aircraft as late as 1991.
We fit a bunch of people comfortably in the larger aircraft (higher PoD on visual searches).

V/r
Spam

Logged
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 5,606

« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2017, 09:17:23 PM »

You need to check your insurance coverage. Some companies won't cover you if you're using your airplane for "Hazardous Activities".
And they count search flying as a Hazardous Activity.
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 27,267

« Reply #8 on: January 15, 2017, 10:01:35 PM »

You need to check your insurance coverage. Some companies won't cover you if you're using your airplane for "Hazardous Activities".
And they count search flying as a Hazardous Activity.

+1 For sure.  An eyeopener and non-starter for many.  Heck for that matter, if you have supplemental health coverage you might
want to take a look at everything that doesn't cover, either.

Looking at the 10 or so most active pilots in my wing, maybe 1-2 own their own or part of an airplane.
And at least one is a low-wing.

MOAs don't have DF gear, proper radios, will have unfamiliar instruments and nav, etc. Not to mention the
very real risk of "I'm taking my plane and going home..." mid-mission.  They also aren't on standby with
priority hangar placement and an assurance they are available.

Flying costs also aren't just avgas, there may also be landing fees, hangar rental or de-ice costs in the winter,
etc., etc. Items CAP doesn't even think about in most wings.

How many aircrew will be willing to take the word of someone they have never met that the plane is up to
CAP spec?  How much additional admin overhead would be required to confirm that sort of thing? 
Is CAP going to require an annual every 100 hours like they do with their planes?  And if not, why are they necessary
on CAP's?  You either need them or you don't.

My guess on this is that with the continued decrease in membership, someone put on their "Goode Idear hat®" and is at least
trying to make an argument about MOAs as a viable alternative to the next aircraft purchase and even possibly as
an avenue to reducing the fleet further.

They are likely to put the hat back in the box sorely disappointed about the state of GA in the US today.  Not to mention
how much more expensive it will be per hour for MOAs without central MX.

"Goode Idear" and "Goode Idear at®" are  registered trademarks of eClipseco Mining and Heavy Machinery Consortium.  All Rights Reserved.  Let eClipseco service all of your rhetoric and propaganda needs!
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.

etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 550

« Reply #9 on: January 15, 2017, 10:46:08 PM »

Well it mentioned "CAP Missions" but didn't specifically mention SAR.  Could be something new coming down the pike. Simple transport type missions, disaster supplies, of types we haven't done before, etc.?  Something single pilot/crew type of mission? Thats why I said "Hmmmm" in my post. Very possibly a new direction ... a new day in CAP ...... (?)
« Last Edit: January 15, 2017, 10:52:41 PM by etodd » Logged
RiverAux
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 10,892

« Reply #10 on: January 15, 2017, 11:18:03 PM »

Last time I paid any attention to this issue CAP seemed to be doing everything possible to discourage use of private aircraft in order to get as many hours as possible on our planes.
Logged
etodd
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 550

« Reply #11 on: January 15, 2017, 11:37:38 PM »

Last time I paid any attention to this issue CAP seemed to be doing everything possible to discourage use of private aircraft in order to get as many hours as possible on our planes.

Yep. Another reason this might possibly be for some 'new' type of mission. I'm very curious what Hdqs may be thinking, but may never know. LOL
Logged
Spaceman3750
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,562

« Reply #12 on: January 15, 2017, 11:48:33 PM »

I'm with Eclipse, I think the good idea fairy mugged someone in an alley and this is the result. Hopefully it goes away...
Logged
"Anyone can hold the helm when the seas are calm ... leadership is about weathering the storm."

The moment any commander or staff member considers themselves a gatekeeper, instead of a facilitator, they have failed at their job.
I can't fix all of CAP's problems, but I can lead from the bottom by building my squadron as a center of excellence to serve as an example of what every unit can be.
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 486

« Reply #13 on: January 16, 2017, 08:03:27 AM »

The CG Aux has been flying MOA for years - they have no USCG provided planes to fly. I forget how it is calculated but they have a standard reimbursement rate based on the number of engines and possibly horsepower.

Maintenance is a member responsibility and I believe the standard is a commercial one.  I never heard of an air crew member questioning whether the maintenance was done. Other than an aviation radio, the only required piece of gear is a marine radio.

I followed Aux aviation deaths for years. None was ever due to equipment failure. All of them were due to pilot error.

This really isn't that hard to figure out.
Logged
RRLE
Seasoned Member

Posts: 486

« Reply #14 on: January 16, 2017, 08:07:48 AM »

The USCG Aux Maintenance Policy (updated)  UPDATE TO AUXILIARY AVIATION FACILITY MAINTENANCE POLICY

I think the original policy was modified from a CAP policy.
Logged
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 339

« Reply #15 on: January 27, 2017, 02:16:31 PM »

Washington State DOT Aviation Division has responsibility for aviation SAR and DR recon within the state.  The WSDT SAR coordinator calls on CAP, but also uses WASAR (Washington Search and Rescue) for many missions.  The bar for participation is high.  Both WSAR and CAP pilots must demonstrate minimum competencies to participate in SAR activities that go beyond the 'normal' CAP requirements.  I think CAP could benefit from using POA (Privately Owned Aircraft) for many of its missions in Washington.  While some members (pilots and otherwise) assume CAP aircraft receive great maintenance and are in tip top condition, while private aircraft are poorly maintained buggies,  that perception just ain't necessarily true.  Not at all.
Logged
duncan
Recruit

Posts: 8
Unit: RMR-CO-001

« Reply #16 on: February 24, 2017, 06:46:45 PM »

OK - so where is this survey found?
Logged
Capt. Rob Duncan
IT Director, COWG
CFI-ASMEL-IA, A&P
Live2Learn
Seasoned Member

Posts: 339

« Reply #17 on: February 25, 2017, 01:06:13 AM »

OK - so where is this survey found?

Too late.  See OP.  "The survey will be active through 1/23/2017" (paraphased).

The following is still on eServices.  The link might??? Still be active.

"Civil Air Patrol eServices News
2017 CAP Pilot Aircraft Ownership Survey
17 Jan 2017

Commanders and Staff,

In case you get any questions from your pilots regarding the legitimacy of a CAP survey from Survey Monkey, it is legit. Your pilots should have received an email from Survey Monkey asking them to complete our 2017 CAP Pilot Aircraft Ownership Survey. We'd appreciate it if you would encourage all of your pilots to compete the survey over the next week. The link to the survey can be found here https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/59ZBPXZ

Thanks in advance."
Logged
Pages: [1] Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: CAP Use of Member Private Aircraft
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.13 | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.07 seconds with 20 queries.