Mission Pilot/Observer

[Flying Pig]

As a Mission Pilot, am I "grandfathered" into automatically being an Observer? Is the Observer qual a lesser included qualification for a Mission Pilot?  For example, if for some reason I lost my medical, let my F91 lapse, etc. Could I jump in as an Observer right away? 

Could I?  Yes, of course.  CAN I?  Is the question. If so, then why dont we automatically get the observer rating when we do our Form 91?

[jayleswo]

As a Mission Pilot, am I "grandfathered" into automatically being an Observer? Is the Observer qual a lesser included qualification for a Mission Pilot?  For example, if for some reason I lost my medical, let my F91 lapse, etc. Could I jump in as an Observer right away? 

No, you are not grandfathered, you still have to go thru the MO SQTR. However, once qualified MO (and MS for that matter) is automatically renewed every time you get a F91. Well, not automatically, you still have to go into the Single Person Achievement Module and submit them for Renewal using the date of your F91 as the Status Date.

-- John

[Eclipse]

As a Mission Pilot, am I "grandfathered" into automatically being an Observer? Is the Observer qual a lesser included qualification for a Mission Pilot?

Mission Observer is not a "lessor qualification" than Mission Pilot - they are different qualifications with specific roles.

One drives, one runs the mission.

A form 91 is not all you need for MP status - that's just a check ride, you also need mission participation and many states require you redo some or all of the taskings during the three year period to maintain qualifications.  This requirment replaced the ARTS and METLS that we all knew and loved.

The 91 ride is only one of a about 28 tasks that may have to be redone. YMMV by state.

See Paragraph 3-7i (below) of  CAPR 60-1 CAP Flight Management (Includes Change 1, Corrected Copy, 2 Feb 09)   

3-7. Classification of CAP Pilots.

i. CAP SAR/DR Mission Pilot.
(1) Must meet the requirements for SAR/DR mission pilot in accordance with CAPR 60-3.
(2) Must satisfactorily complete a CAPF 91, CAP Mission Pilot Checkout, within the preceding 24 calendar months.
j. CAP Mission Check Pilot.
(1) Must be a qualified SAR/DR mission pilot.
(2) Have participated in 25 mission sorties as a SAR/DR mission pilot.
(3) Must satisfactorily complete a CAPF 91 mission check pilot check ride given by a CAP Mission Check Pilot Examiner within the preceding 24 calendar months IAW CAPR 60-3.
(4) Satisfactorily complete the National Check Pilot Standardization Course prior to initial appointment.
(5) Must be designated in writing as a CAP Mission Check Pilot by the wing or region commander, Executive Director, or their designee.
k. CAP Mission Check Pilot Examiner. Qualified as a CAP Mission Check Pilot and designated in writing as a CAP Mission Check Pilot Examiner by the wing or region commander, Executive Director, or their designee.

Also see Paragraph 2-3n. (below) of  CAPR 60-3 CAP Emergency Services Training and Operational Missions

2-3. Specialty Rating Requirements and Performance Standards.
n. Search and Rescue (SAR)/Disaster Relief (DR) Mission Pilot (MP).
1) Trainee Prerequisites. Satisfy the following to begin training for MP:
a) At least 18 years of age.
b) Current and qualified CAP pilot in accordance with CAPR 60-1, with at least 175 hours pilot in command time.
c) Qualified Transport Mission Pilot.
d) Qualified Mission Scanner.
e) Qualified GES.
2) Qualified. Complete all requirements listed in the most current version of the Aircrew and Flight Line Task Guide for MP.

b. To renew an expiring specialty qualification, the member must:
1) Be a current CAP member.
2) Be evaluated on at least one mission (actual or training) every 3 years by a qualified evaluator as outlined in
paragraph 2-2a in each specialty (or equivalent specialty) for which renewal is requested. A matrix of equivalent specialties
is included as attachment 4 to this regulation. During the evaluation, candidates will be required to demonstrate their ability
to perform and/or evaluate all tasks required to qualify in that specialty. This evaluation does not have to be completed on an
Air Force approved training mission. CAPF 91 check rides will be considered equivalent to this evaluation for all aircrew
positions for mission pilots. A separate evaluation is not required. Personnel that are currently qualified in a specialty are
expected to be re-evaluated within 3 years of issuance of this regulation change.

[CadetProgramGuy]

Also according to 60-3, Attachment 4:

If you are a mission pilot, and are qualified already in TMP, MO, and MS...

You do get credit for it when it comes to renewal.

[Mustang]

Mission Observer is not a "lessor qualification" than Mission Pilot - they are different qualifications with specific roles.

One drives, one runs the mission.

Reg cite, please.  This "Observer as Mission Commander" crap has no regulatory basis and is chiefly a GLR invention (with subsequent bleed-over into the NESA school of thought).  Please show me in the regs or even in the MO SQTR where the MO is responsible for or is required to demonstrate "running the mission".  Now, should a green MP be all ears to the guidance of an experienced MO?  Absolutely.  Good CRM demands it--even of an experienced MP--and in fact, for someone with a pilot's license, serving as an MO is a superb MP apprenticeship. But ultimately, an MO is nothing more than an MS who has received additional training so that he/she may assist the MP with their responsibilities--including that of mission command. 

Moreover, there is a 100% overlap between MO and MP tasks if you look at the tasks themselves.  To my thinking, there is no difference between "assist in planning and performing a route search" (MO task O-2109) and "demonstrate planning and flying a route search" (MP task O-2101). Academically, it's the same task.  In fact, most (if not all) of the MO tasks are either assisting the MP or getting a non-pilot up to speed on common pilot knowledge and tasks like navigation, weather, etc.  In other words--and contrary to your assertion that they are different qualifications--the MO skillset is a subset of the MP skillset.  Thus, in fulfilling the requirements for MP, one has also satisfied those for MO.  Those few tasks that an MP isn't required to perform for the SQTR (operate the FM radio, operate the DF gear) are required in the Form 91 checkride.   Thus, there is much truth to the equation:

MS + MO + FAA PPL + 200 hrs PIC = MP

Which brings me to another point: why is there no checkride for MOs or MSs?  Huge oversight, IMHO.

[DG]

As a Mission Pilot, am I "grandfathered" into automatically being an Observer? Is the Observer qual a lesser included qualification for a Mission Pilot?  For example, if for some reason I lost my medical, let my F91 lapse, etc. Could I jump in as an Observer right away? 

Could I?  Yes, of course.  CAN I?  Is the question. If so, then why dont we automatically get the observer rating when we do our Form 91?

What is the regulation?

Did you consider looking there?

[CadetProgramGuy]

Which brings me to another point: why is there no checkride for MOs or MSs?  Huge oversight, IMHO.

But there is.  You must fly 2 missions, as per the SQTR.

Another topic that is missing is that MO's are not required to be a pilot.  In most of CAP there is a redundancy.  I think that MO's should at least have enough flight training to land the aircraft in an emergency.

[SJFedor]

Eclipse-

Keep reading that paragraph....

b. To renew an expiring specialty qualification, the member must:
1) Be a current CAP member.
2) Be evaluated on at least one mission (actual or training) every 3 years by a qualified evaluator as outlined in
paragraph 2-2a in each specialty (or equivalent specialty) for which renewal is requested. A matrix of equivalent specialties
is included as attachment 4 to this regulation. During the evaluation, candidates will be required to demonstrate their ability
to perform and/or evaluate all tasks required to qualify in that specialty. This evaluation does not have to be completed on an
Air Force approved training mission. CAPF 91 check rides will be considered equivalent to this evaluation for all aircrew
positions for mission pilots. A separate evaluation is not required. Personnel that are currently qualified in a specialty are
expected to be re-evaluated within 3 years of issuance of this regulation change.

Emphasis mine.

[Eclipse]

Reg cite, please.  This "Observer as Mission Commander" crap has no regulatory basis and is chiefly a GLR invention (with subsequent bleed-over into the NESA school of thought).  Please show me in the regs or even in the MO SQTR where the MO is responsible for or is required to demonstrate "running the mission".  Now, should a green MP be all ears to the guidance of an experienced MO?  Absolutely.  Good CRM demands it--even of an experienced MP--and in fact, for someone with a pilot's license, serving as an MO is a superb MP apprenticeship. But ultimately, an MO is nothing more than an MS who has received additional training so that he/she may assist the MP with their responsibilities--including that of mission command. 

I don't need to cite a reg, its common sense.

The reason that "crap" was started, was specifically because of mission pilots who don't realize that we're actually supposed to do something with the airplanes besides just provide them cheap(er) proficiency hours.

Your defining it as "crap" is more evidence of the same mentality that left Mission Scanners sitting on the ramp without even getting a briefing for their photo run - sometimes to the point where the aircraft was on the ramp with the prop spinning before the front-seat guys (MP and MP #2 pretending to be an MO) realized they had no way to actually accomplish the mission.

The MP has ONE JOB - bus driver.  Nothing more, nothing less.  The indignation you're feeling right now is the same that the rest of the aircrew feels when the insinuation is made that they are somehow ancillary to the MP - neither can do their job without the other, and the sooner we all accept that, let everyone do their jobs, and lose the zippered-sun-god mentality, the better off we will all be.

Sadly, SJFedor's interpretation appears to be correct - no wonder we continue to have issues at missions, our MP's can maintain their qualifications without actually going to any missions.

[Flying Pig]

For those who get bent out of shape by me using the term "lessor included"  Its a legal term, not an insult.

[Eclipse]

For those who get bent out of shape by me using the term "lessor included"  Its a legal term, not an insult.

Point taken, but in this case its not necessarily appropriate.

There is a direct 1-2-3 on the Ground - GTM-GTL-GBD, you can't get from M to D without L.

Not the case in the airplane where you can go from MS to MO without ever sitting in the right seat.  So if you were/are an MO, I don't have any issue with your getting credit as an MP, but if you never were an MO, you shouldn't.

The above is also the reason we have hundreds, if not thousands, of Mission Pilots who can't operate the CAP radios or the DF gear, because its entirely possible they never had to, ever, since in some threads we've seen there are check pilots who think that stuff is "optional" or "discussion based".

You can't have it both ways.

[MSgt Van]

We always train a pilot through scanner and observer SQTR's on their way to Mission Pilot. Not sayin' it's required, but we think it's best.

[SJFedor]

Sadly, SJFedor's interpretation appears to be correct - no wonder we continue to have issues at missions, our MP's can maintain their qualifications without actually going to any missions.

Not an interpretation, just quoting of the text. It doesn't really leave any room for interpretation, it is what it is.

Bob, you and I see eye to eye on some things, unfortunately this isn't going to be one of them. You're making an awful lot of broad statements and general "talk down's" about mission pilots, and making statements about a few bad apples you've met and lumping all of us in with them. Until you've flown with "hundreds, if not thousands, of Mission pilots who can't operate the CAP radios or the DF gear" then you really have no room to make those kinds of statements. In fact, since you're not a pilot, I don't really understand why you're putting your horse in this race. If you're seeing a problem with your pilots in your Group, then i'm sure you already know it's your responsibility to correct the problem. But until you've gone through the hoops to get qualified as a SAR/DR MP, you don't really have any personal knowledge and experience of it other then what you hear, what you might see, and what you read in regulations. I'm at the point where I'm taking personal offense to your constant berating of mission pilots in this and other threads.

Those few tasks that an MP isn't required to perform for the SQTR (operate the FM radio, operate the DF gear) are required in the Form 91 checkride.   

Actually, they are required to perform those tasks on the SQTR before the 91 checkride, as well as on that ride. Advanced training tasks O-2001: Operate the Aircraft Audio Panel and O-2005: Operate the Aircraft DF. And, for those of you saying the audio panel doesn't include the CAP FM radio, there's the catch all in the MS SQTR, which the MP candidate has to have done before they start. Advanced Task O-2018 Operate the Aircraft Communications Equipment.


And actually, just as an aside, there's NOT just a direct 1-2-3 on the Ground. You CAN go from M to D without L, it's just a different kind of M.

m. Ground Branch Director (GBD).
1) Trainee Prerequisites. Satisfy the following to begin training for GBD:
a) At least 18 years of age.
b) Qualified Ground Team Leader or Urban DF Team Member (need not be current).
c) Qualified GES.
2) Qualified. Complete all requirements listed in the most current version of the Mission Base Staff Task Guide for GBD.

Emphasis mine.

So, by regulation, one could be a Ground Branch Director without ever doing anything other then doing 2 training sorties chasing ELTs, and never being in the woods. Should it be that way? Absolutely not. The ground side isn't perfect either.

[Phil Hirons, Jr.]

And actually, just as an aside, there's NOT just a direct 1-2-3 on the Ground. You CAN go from M to D without L, it's just a different kind of M.

m. Ground Branch Director (GBD).
1) Trainee Prerequisites. Satisfy the following to begin training for GBD:
a) At least 18 years of age.
b) Qualified Ground Team Leader or Urban DF Team Member (need not be current).
c) Qualified GES.
2) Qualified. Complete all requirements listed in the most current version of the Mission Base Staff Task Guide for GBD.

Emphasis mine.

So, by regulation, one could be a Ground Branch Director without ever doing anything other then doing 2 training sorties chasing ELTs, and never being in the woods. Should it be that way? Absolutely not. The ground side isn't perfect either.

That is interesting. The e-services SQTR does not support the UDF option.

UDF Teams can go out with just 2 UDF qualified members. I usually try to have a GTL with any ground ops team.

I could see a UDF trained only GBD on a large (121.5 with no satelite ) ELT search, but with the large area on these type of missions, you never know when they might need to go into the woods.

[RiverAux]

If you've got a plane with a Becker DF unit its going to be somewhat difficult for a pilot to learn how to use it while doing their normal MP duties and I don't think it would hurt them a bit to sit in the right seat and run it like its supposed to. 

Same for the CAP radio.  While a pilot could reach across and operate that equipment, I don't think it would always be terribly safe to do so as you're going to have to take your eyes off the sky for a while. 

Quite frankly, the most important skill that an Observer is going to learn is ground team coordination and that also requires some time in the right seat to do correctly. 

Thats why I'm not a big fan of mission pilots getting "credit" for everything for every mission. 

Whether or not they're "running" the mission, the Observer position is a pretty separate skill set from MP in real life even if that isn't reflected in the SQTRs. 

[Flying Pig]

But as a Mission Pilot, I can fly right seat on missions as long as my Form 91 is up to date but as soon as it expires, Im in the back seat as a scanner. Not a whole lot of sense there

[Eclipse]

But as a Mission Pilot, I can fly right seat on missions as long as my Form 91 is up to date..

In what capacity?  Safety pilot?  Not as an Observer unless you are one.

[KyCAP]

He would be a second mission pilot in the aircrew.

[Gunner C]

He would be a second mission pilot in the aircrew.

That would lessen the number of eyeballs by one half.  You're either a pilot or not.  I've seen phenomenal mission pilots who were so-so observers.  I've seen crappy mission pilots who were pretty darned good observers.  But to tell you the truth, I've never seen anyone who was top notch as both.

When I plan a mission, I do it to make the best use of light, available eyeballs, winds, and tactics.  I coordinate with the pilot and tell him what I need for the mission and how I plan to prosecute it.  He will tell me if I'm planning anything outside the capabilities of the aircraft, outside of FARs, or just plain dumb.  If he wants to do something else, I have him explain why it's better.  If we can't come to a compromise (has only happened once), then I go back to the AOBD and get another pilot.  I rely on the pilot to get the eyeballs over the target, at the correct speed and altitude, and keep us out of the dirt. 

I know  about sun angles, documenting photo missions, whether or not spendler (sp?) turns are necessary, and how to coordinate with multiple ground teams. All of these things are necessary to be an effective observer and they're things that I've done from the beginning.  When I'm not sitting in the right seat, I can't access the radios, I can't work the DF equipment, I can't monitor a myriad of things that are necessary.  I know what a carrier-only signal sounds and looks like on the equipment.  I know where the signal null is when we pass over it.  I know how to direct an aircraft on an aural search.  All of this has taken a long time to get good at.

An aircrew member can be a good pilot or a good observer.  Both require a great deal of practice and study.  You can't do both well.  Pick one and get really good at it.  Training is difficult to get for observers, especially since pilots get first dibs (way too often) to the right seat.  Don't be the type of guy who bumps a full time observer out of the way.  Those of us who train them have to train twice as many since about the second mission where they get bumped, they say "shove it" to CAP. (If you're wondering why there's so often hard feelings with pilots, that's why).

[Eclipse]

Gunner, you can come and play with our guys anytime you want.

Typical situation with MP#2 in the right seat:

CUL: You were off the air for 45 minutes and we declared you missing, was something wrong with the radios?

MP#2:  No, I was monitoring ATC for safety.

CUL:  So who was on the CAP radios?  Didn't you get the Comm briefing?

MP#2: Yes, but I felt it was better to be on the ATC "just in case".

CUL:  What about check ins?  Can I see your log?

MP#2:  I didn't keep one, I was watching some weather coming in on the XM.  Also, most of the flight I had the stick so the MP could take some pictures of the target.

AOBD: That's the scanners job, what was he doing? 

MP#2:  He probably got some, too.  You should check with him.

BTDT, had to mitigate the remedial training more than once.