Civil Air Patrol Helicopter

[JayT]

As far as funding goes let me answer that question with a question. If we have LE, EMS, Military handle these missions where does the funding come from? My point it that really all we are talking about is reapportioning monies that are already spent. While possibly at a lower cost. As far a 7-10 hours of maintenance time per flight hour. I fully agree with you that there are aircraft that might be that maintenance intensive but for the types of ships that CAP might field it is highly inflated.

Speaking of highly inflated, so is your figure of $200/hr. Assuming a labor multiplier of 2.0 find me a CAP mechanic who has a wage of $100/hr. Of course you chose the worst cast shop rates there so if we go with those figures then we have to throw out your argument about infrastructure and tooling costs.

Can't support the cost of fuel? You just said in the previous paragraph that the argument could be made that a piston plane and piston helo have similar fuel burns. My squadron flies Beavers, do you think a Beaver can beat the 14 gph published for an R-44?

You can provide the 'service' at lower cost airframe wise, but can you also provide the same aviability? The same staffing requirement? Can you provide law enforcement officers, Flight Paramedics and Nurse's? Training?

[Flying Pig]

Law Enforcement funding for air units comes from that specific departments budget.  In my case, the Sheriff gets $101 million per year.  She chooses to spend $600K of that supporting an air unit of 2 MD500Es and a Cessna 206.  So it comes from the County tax base.  EMS is a private company that bills insurance companies.  Military, well, the military.

None of those funding sources will be redirected to CAP.  I cant see the local Sheriff (and I say Sheriff because they are responsible for SAR) giving up part of their budget to support CAP.  For the local Police Department Air Unit, is the city council and city manager going to redirect their air unit funds to the local CAP squadron? If they give it to CAP, you will have the Red Cross and every other humanitarian non-profit in line with their hands out also.
Is the local PRIVATE air ambulance provider going to be required by the government to carry CAP on their backs? And again, it comes down to cheaper is not always better.  In my air unit, we train approx 30 hours per month on skills related to SAR.  Yes, thats roughly 3 full work days per month dedicated completely to training.  The other 6 days of the week, we are actually performing the mission or the individual crews will go out and train for a couple of hours during their shift if they can squeeze it in.  In addition, we are a one stop shop.  Search, Rescue, law enforcement authority and everything in between.  We are only limited by our equipment. 
I know the State Troopers in AK now fly an R-44, however, they used to fly a AS350B3.  Their capabilities are now NOTHING compared to what they once were.  With the budget issues, it was either an R44 or nothing for them.  They didnt get rid of the AStar because the R44 was better. 

Maintenance.  When you start talking about helicopters.  You in a whole different boat.  The maintenance facility where I am, the shop rate is $95 p/h.  Our Department mechanic does part time work and charges $90.  Your not going to find many good hearted maintenance shops willing to give CAP a discount rate on helicopter maintenance.

With the Squadrons in AK flying Beavers, you cant compare that.  That is a very, very small part of flying for CAP. I dont think anyone ever suggested a Beaver was better on gas than an R44.  I am pretty sure the comparison was made for the other 99% of CAP who fly 182's and 206's.

Believe me.  If CAP ever got helicopters, Id be in line.  But it wouldnt be practical or even affordable. 

[raivo]

CAPCopter One, reporting heavy traffic!

[JB_407]

As far as funding goes let me answer that question with a question. If we have LE, EMS, Military handle these missions where does the funding come from? My point it that really all we are talking about is reapportioning monies that are already spent. While possibly at a lower cost. As far a 7-10 hours of maintenance time per flight hour. I fully agree with you that there are aircraft that might be that maintenance intensive but for the types of ships that CAP might field it is highly inflated.

Speaking of highly inflated, so is your figure of $200/hr. Assuming a labor multiplier of 2.0 find me a CAP mechanic who has a wage of $100/hr. Of course you chose the worst cast shop rates there so if we go with those figures then we have to throw out your argument about infrastructure and tooling costs.

Can't support the cost of fuel? You just said in the previous paragraph that the argument could be made that a piston plane and piston helo have similar fuel burns. My squadron flies Beavers, do you think a Beaver can beat the 14 gph published for an R-44?

You can provide the 'service' at lower cost airframe wise, but can you also provide the same aviability? The same staffing requirement? Can you provide law enforcement officers, Flight Paramedics and Nurse's? Training?

We are talking CAP missions here, can CAP provide any of the above? All I am looking for is an increase in CAP capability. More to the point of your question and keeping in mind that my response might be different if I was in a different area. You have to remember that here we have limited availability of resources of any sort. So yes I believe we could provide the same availability, our trooper helo is an unstaffed asset, yeah we can match that. LEO's no but we are not flying law enforcement missions so who cares? Paramedics and nurses, yes. My squadron has already been down this road, these questions have been answered. The only difficulty here is selling the idea.

[JayT]

As far as funding goes let me answer that question with a question. If we have LE, EMS, Military handle these missions where does the funding come from? My point it that really all we are talking about is reapportioning monies that are already spent. While possibly at a lower cost. As far a 7-10 hours of maintenance time per flight hour. I fully agree with you that there are aircraft that might be that maintenance intensive but for the types of ships that CAP might field it is highly inflated.

Speaking of highly inflated, so is your figure of $200/hr. Assuming a labor multiplier of 2.0 find me a CAP mechanic who has a wage of $100/hr. Of course you chose the worst cast shop rates there so if we go with those figures then we have to throw out your argument about infrastructure and tooling costs.

Can't support the cost of fuel? You just said in the previous paragraph that the argument could be made that a piston plane and piston helo have similar fuel burns. My squadron flies Beavers, do you think a Beaver can beat the 14 gph published for an R-44?

You can provide the 'service' at lower cost airframe wise, but can you also provide the same availability? The same staffing requirement? Can you provide law enforcement officers, Flight Paramedics and Nurse's? Training?

We are talking CAP missions here, can CAP provide any of the above? All I am looking for is an increase in CAP capability. More to the point of your question and keeping in mind that my response might be different if I was in a different area. You have to remember that here we have limited availability of resources of any sort. So yes I believe we could provide the same availability, our trooper helo is an unstaffed asset, yeah we can match that. LEO's no but we are not flying law enforcement missions so who cares? Paramedics and nurses, yes. My squadron has already been down this road, these questions have been answered. The only difficulty here is selling the idea.

So you're squadron can supply trained and equipped FP-C's and CCRN's with ventilators, EKG monitors, drugs, who have their own insurance, on a platform that an insurance company will pay for?

[heliodoc]

There was a mention of R22 / R44 series helos  earlier and I was merely mentioning the SFAR due to handling an training issues

Thinks CAP pilots could handle the additional training costs?  Then the questioning of infrastructure costs...you are questioning folks who have seen and worked with 20,000 to 40,000 dollar  Olympus borescopes for borescoping turbine engines.  So throwing out my infrastructure costs is pretty productive, eh?

Take a look at the special tools that  helicopter support ( jigs and fixtures, etc,) requires and you WILL soon realize " my infrastructure costs" will be pretty to closely aligned with 60 to 70 K at a bare minimum.

CAP SIMPLY could not afford the costs....oh wait yes they could.....eliminate the cadet program, eliminate some of the ES training and funding...

Oh yeah...they money has to come from some where JB 407 and some others who say they are in the helo biz 'cuz its close to their hearts

That is fine....  CAPers AGAIN will again see the costs double, triple increase, if one is carrying hospital equipment on board for life support.

The dream of of CAP helos is  somewhat far off .......very far off.  Nice to dream, nice dream to have.  But CAP is simply not very well set up for helicopter support unless you call 1 task in a SQTR series set up for "helo operations."

We folks in the maintenance field are not too far off in the 75 to 200 hr shop rate ...do not where CAPers can come here and say we are wrong in our assessments of true costs.  What are the "ship that CAP could field that are cheaper?"  Look at parts costs...some are more expensive than "CAP preferred pricing" by any stretch!!!

Keep arguing about CAP helicopters....There is a few of us here that have pretty well explained to the CAP audience about helo costs

[JB_407]

Heliodoc

You pose the question "What are the "ship that CAP could field that are cheaper?" <sic>. Well since you didn't specify a ship but instead suggested a virtual ship with a per hour maintenance cost of $2000. Even at the low end of your argument at $750/ hr. the choices are many.
Certainly an R-44 is well below that number as would be a B206.

[heliodoc]

Pick it apart anyway you want, JB

Did not mention anything about 2000 per hour for maintenance.

Surely an R44 and a Bell 206...still maintenance costs will be higher than a C182 or 206.  How about that reliable Allison 250 turbine that might  run well into 50K for an overhaul depending on severity to a complete or quite possibly 500K for an engine replacement.  Not saying these are a and fast numbers, but I am willing to see you pull that one apart also.  Still not a cost for the CAP consolidated MX program.  Think CAP will be able to absorb those costs.  Some helicopter engine and parts replacements can cost as much as ONE C 182 NAVIII

But you have your own facts JB, run it up the flag to NHQ CAP.  We will see how long CAP takes to even establish the program.

Helicopters in CAP...still not going to happen in the immediate future for CAP unless it has a major infusion of cash in the current economy.

Further the fact, CAP NHQ could not even come up with reliable training standards NOR anybody willing to VOLUNTEER their time in that arena unless there was major training and Form 5 /91 support to such an operation..

There may be some operators willing to donate their time, but not on a very long term basis

Ask around...cash is what drives the helicopter program and Flying Pig has demonstrated at a local level, some decisions of operators, who I am sure its a cash driven proposition

Keep hopin for that CAP SAR helicopter......

[Flying Pig]

JB, Helidoc is not offering an alternative because there isnt one.  All an R44 is good for is an observation platform.  You talked about exploring the medical side.  You are not going to do any type of EMS anything with an R-44.  All it has in the back it two tiny seats.  My agency is getting a UH-1 here soon (hopefully).  We are looking into the equipping it for BLS capabilities.  You cant do any of that in a piston because you would have to leave the flight officer (observer/EMT) behind because of weight.  And if you did squeeze in, the patient would be sitting in your lap.  This isnt something CAP can or even should be doing.

When I talked earlier about the training time my unit conducts, I would say at least half of that training is related directly to SAR.  The things CAP would be (trying) doing.  Minimum, you would need an MD500 or a Jet Ranger.  Beyond that, CAP would be buying helicopters to do what we do with 182's.  Fly around low and slow looking at things.  Anyway...its a fairly silly discussion.   The pistons wont do the job and the turbines are to expensive.

Initially, I saw your screen name with the "407" in it and I thought maybe you were a helicopter pilot.  Maybe you are.  But I will throw this out.  Until you have been involved in the helicopter industry, its very hard to understand how expensive they are to operate over airplanes and how the flying is different.  Its a totally different skill set.  The helicopter I fly, an MD500E has 5 main rotor blades.  Each one is $12,000. I see how careful we fly that thing and everyday there are maintenance issues that need to be addressed.  We bought new pitch links for the tail rotor. They were $2400.
With the CAP, I would see over torques and over temps being more common than usual if we had turbines.  You hot start a C20B and your looking at about minimum $200K.  And thats if they can repair it.
As far as pistons, I did my PPL-Comm Helo in a Schweizer 300C and also did my initial mountain training in it as well.  You start heading through 5500-6000 ft even on a cold day and you are sucking wind.  Now you decide to throw in all the CAP gear and radios?  Not a chance.

The other issue we run into is that many CAP pilots have a PPL and possibly an instrument.  Few have a Commercial.  In airplanes, you can gain several thousand hours and a decent amount of experience with a PPL.  In a helicopter, it doesnt work that way.  So lets face it, the majority of people looking to fly the CAP helos will be very low time student types looking to build time.  And the guys with the time and experience we need to make it successful aren't looking to fly pistons because they have already moved on to their turbine jobs. 

So now what.  Why dont we in CAP push for something as simple as turbo charged airplanes? I fly a Turbo 206 at work and I have no issues in the Sierras at 11K+ doing basically CAP type work.  I can climb out of canyons.  After I fly a canyon I can easily climb back to altitude and do it again.  It doesnt take me forever to get back to the top.  Flying into and out of Bishop CA on a hot day in August where the DA can been 8000'....no problem.   How about some multi-engine planes for transportation flights or other missions where speed is the issue.  CAP could easily justify that.  Now that doesnt mean there is money to pay for it, but it can sure be justified. 


Helidoc...you WAAAAY low-balled that Turbine overhaul at $50K.  We just had an engine done for about $70K.  And youll remember, there is the compressor section AND the turbine section.  That was just the turbine section!  And it wasnt even broken!

[JB_407]

Thanks all for your responses. A truly spirited debate, eh? I have lost  6 long missives to this thread so I am frustrated and not going to duplicate my efforts.

[tdepp]

JB, Helidoc is not offering an alternative because there isnt one.  All an R44 is good for is an observation platform. 

Easy solution. CAP blimps as observation platforms--and advertising platforms. 

[flyboy53]

So why not!

The powers that be up above are always talking about force multipliers. I wonder what a helicopter with an EMT or two, or GT members, would do for our missions?

I'm a product of the Pennsylvania Wing when the Ranger program was really strong and there was limited use of helicopters...and of course, you should check out the old C.B. Colby book, "This is Your Civil Air Patrol," to see the ground team that was standing by an Air Force helicopter, ready for transport.

[Flying Pig]

Havnt you read any of the above posts?

[heliodoc]

flyboy...

That is right...CAP STANDING by the AF helicopter and you mentioned limited use of helicopters...Today's risk averse CAP and someof its unclear regulations would NOT be a good contender for helicopter operations until they MONEY, intestinal fortitude, and a willingness to stand up and MAINTAIN a program of this nature.  CAP maybe on the leading edge of technology....just not with helicopters

Force multiplier for helicopters....good 'ol CASH, dinero, bucks, sawbucks, Kugerand (sp), Deutchmarks (sp), anything on Wall Street that is NOT fake money, is the true force multiplier

Anything with some substantial "force multiplier" cash backing can be in this game.  CAP just ought to stick with fixed wing

[Flying Pig]

OK.  Lets take this a step further.  Can you find me ANY volunteer organization that is regularly flying helicopters?

[Ned]

The powers that be up above are always talking about force multipliers. I wonder what a helicopter with an EMT or two, or GT members, would do for our missions?

Great idea. 

WIWAC, we toured the USS Valley Forge, an Essex class carrier that was being decommissioned.  Even as a cadet I could see that CAWG should have screened her at DRMO and acquired her for CAP SAR use.  A mobile search base like that would be ideal in California, with a fairly narrow state and a long coast line.

Since she could hit 33 knots, we could use our current aircraft fleet without modification.  By just heading the ship into the wind, our little 172's could have essentially just VTOL'd.  No need for arrester gear and all that training.

We could have used the flight deck for the cadet competitions.  No need to have markers and flagmen for "out of bounds" violations - the cadets would simply disappear to be recovered shortly thereafter by the safety boats.  (Hopefully)

It would have been a wicked addition to CAP.  Talk about your force mulitpliers!

[clarkarc]

OK.  Lets take this a step further.  Can you find me ANY volunteer organization that is regularly flying helicopters?

 

The coast guard auxiliary has 3 helicopters.  As you may or may not know the aircraft are owned by the members.

[JB_407]

OK.  Lets take this a step further.  Can you find me ANY volunteer organization that is regularly flying helicopters?

 

The coast guard auxiliary has 3 helicopters.  As you may or may not know the aircraft are owned by the members.

aircraft and boats members are reimbursed for flight at flat rate. check out their minimum requirements for a mission pilot.

[JB_407]

Flying Pig

A special thanks to you and Heliodoc. The two of you have clearly put a lot of thought into this.

Perhaps I haven't been clear in my postings here, I thought I had indicated in the beginning of this thread that I both owned and piloted both FW and Helos. I am well aware of the costs and training.

I think doc took it personally when I called his figures inflated and he became a bit defensive when I suggested that he had stated a $2000/hr. maintenace cost. Doc, those numbers came from the high end of your estimate of 10 hrs of maintenance at a shope rate of $200/hr. I take no responsibility for the math that goes with that. I could provide a list of helicopters that will better that cost however there is really no point.

The bottom line is that the cost matters not if the funding is there. In fact almost every objection put forth by posters on this thread could be handled if the funding was made available.

To sa

[JB_407]

Seem to have an issue with long  replies, sorry.

Anyhow. It is fine to offer up the opinion that CAP would not fund helo ops. You could even argue that they would not, thats simply a matter of probability. To say they "can't" is like saying man can't fly.

FP back to your issue of pilot ratings I would point out the formmer requirements for the GA-8. CPL, Instrument, 500 pic. I understand those have been relaxed some. You stated that we would have a problem finding qualified pilots. Perhaps in some areas that would be a problem, however for the squadrons here, there is a long list of Blackhawk Pilots that would love to join CAP. They show up at meetings all the time. My objections to comments about the SFARs re:robbies is based on the fact that for a 200hr. pilot they don't really add any training requirements beyond a slight tweak in the form rid.