Where to find the CAP Regulation for Flight Suits at a SAREX

[SarDragon]

Is it sad i used to wear my Nomex Gloves that Way while in the Dessert?

Was your dessert tiramisu, or maybe pumpkin pie? 

[SarDragon]

One could argue that you could wear the flight suit on a GT mission.....as the restriction in 39-1 only states "Air Crew Only"......not "Air Crew while performing Flight Operations Only".

Yes this is nit picking.....and yes I agree that Flight Suits (blue or green) or the CAP Utility Uniform (which is not restricted to Flight Crew Only) are inpractical for GT.    Push comes to shove.......getting the mission done is more important than what uniform you wear.....if you "had" to fly you could do it in a Mess Dress....same story for GT....if you "had" to go out on a GT or UDF....or man a mission base position.....you could do it in a flight suit.

We have multiple uniforms (not talking about USAF vs Corporates) so that you can use the best tool for the job........but getting the job done is more important then using the right tool is most cases.

That goes for Flying Pig's comment about not wearing a CAP uniform on a mission........if getting in proper uniform would hinder the mission......then go with it.

Ha...  I've heard stories of a UDF tasking during a wing banquet...

I watched it happen one night. We had half the wing's A/C assets sitting right outside the hotel, and an aircrew went out and flew a mission.

[SarDragon]

Don't forget your gloves with the flight suit. 

I don't wear one- ever.

[video redacted]

That's a CAWG 182T out of Group 1.

[ßτε]

Don't forget your gloves with the flight suit. 

I don't wear one- ever.

[video redacted]

That's a CAWG 182T out of Group 1.

Yes, but until recently, it was a CAWG 182T out of Group 3.

[SarDragon]

Fair enough. I was using the latest WMIRS data. We've been involved in the airframe shuffle, too.

[a2capt]

Yeah, I'm surprised that  CAPF 498 got moved from it's long time prior base, right after they spent a ton of loot on it.

[PHall]

Yeah, I'm surprised that  CAPF 498 got moved from it's long time prior base, right after they spent a ton of loot on it.

The squadron spent nothing. National Headquarters spent a chunk for the new interior and panel.
It just took 19 months...

[a2capt]

I didn't say the Squadron spent anything.

[Private Investigator]

I spend my time on the ground working communications or in the plane as an air crew. If needed I might fly high bird with a repeater on board.  That said knowing I could be doing both tasks I would dress in BDU's.

A CAP plane went down in 1994 (?) and the Scanner survive in the backseat and had to kick out the back window to escape. Anything not covered on him in NOMEX had serious burns. The MP and MO were killed on impact.

[Private Investigator]

One could argue that you could wear the flight suit on a GT mission.....as the restriction in 39-1 only states "Air Crew Only"......not "Air Crew while performing Flight Operations Only".

Yes this is nit picking.....and yes I agree that Flight Suits (blue or green) or the CAP Utility Uniform (which is not restricted to Flight Crew Only) are inpractical for GT.    Push comes to shove.......getting the mission done is more important than what uniform you wear.....if you "had" to fly you could do it in a Mess Dress....same story for GT....if you "had" to go out on a GT or UDF....or man a mission base position.....you could do it in a flight suit.

We have multiple uniforms (not talking about USAF vs Corporates) so that you can use the best tool for the job........but getting the job done is more important then using the right tool is most cases.

That goes for Flying Pig's comment about not wearing a CAP uniform on a mission........if getting in proper uniform would hinder the mission......then go with it.

Ha...  I've heard stories of a UDF tasking during a wing banquet...

I watched it happen one night. We had half the wing's A/C assets sitting right outside the hotel, and an aircrew went out and flew a mission.

They should have their NOMEX handy.

[lordmonar]

I spend my time on the ground working communications or in the plane as an air crew. If needed I might fly high bird with a repeater on board.  That said knowing I could be doing both tasks I would dress in BDU's.

A CAP plane went down in 1994 (?) and the Scanner survive in the backseat and had to kick out the back window to escape. Anything not covered on him in NOMEX had serious burns. The MP and MO were killed on impact.

Ah......the old NOMEX is a safety item.

Yes NOMEX will protect you in a fire.....so will cotton, leather, etc, et al.......back in the day when PCR required NOMEX we used to go round and round on this subject.......If CAP was really serious about "saving lives in the event of a crash" they would require flight helmets before they required NOMEX as most deaths and injuries in a survival crash are caused by impact trama to the head....not fire.

[Mustang]

Only in as much as their AOR, which in most wings does not extend to mission operations unless
the Unit CC is coincidentally an IC or other related mission staff.

A unit CC is free to mandate whatever he wants for meetings, training exercises, etc., that he runs,
but his rules are not enforceable outside his unit, and during a mission, if the IC or AOBD indicated
a flight suit was not required, no way he could enforce his rules in that context.

Wrong. Unit commanders absolutely retain command of their personnel when those personnel are signed into a mission. They are under the OPERATIONAL CONTROL of the IC, but are still under the command of their home unit.

Back during the Fossett search, I was tasked with landing on a dirt strip--a violation of CAPR 60-1 RMR Supp 1--to retrieve the crew of another aircraft that had made an emergency landing following an alternator failure.  The RMR/CC could have absolutely made hay over this violation (had he known about it, heh) despite my being under the operational control of an IC from (and within) another region with no similar policy.

[lordmonar]

Yes and no.....As you said  OPERATIONAL Authority.   RMR's supplement to 60-1 only applies to RMR.......no to RMR personnel operating outside RMR.

So No the RMR commander could not make hay to you following the legal orders of those appointed over you.....the IC.

Same deal with uniforms.....Wing X allows Pink Tutu with the field uniforms.....anyone deploying to Wing Y is supposed to follow wing Y's directives.

Even on active duty......local base rules apply.

Having said that......on active duty.....no one really cared that much.   Such things are handled at the lowest levels (usually).

[Eclipse]

Unit commanders absolutely retain command of their personnel when those personnel are signed into a mission. They are under the OPERATIONAL CONTROL of the IC, but are still under the command of their home unit.

Nope.

A given CC's authority ends at the border, bother figuratively and literally.

[lordmonar]

Unit commanders absolutely retain command of their personnel when those personnel are signed into a mission. They are under the OPERATIONAL CONTROL of the IC, but are still under the command of their home unit.

Nope.

A given CC's authority ends at the border, bother figuratively and literally.

No.....ADCON....or administrative control continues no matter where the member is.     
That is......you can't cross the border for a SAREX or Mission and expect the local wing commander to promote you.
So.......a deployed member is ADCON under his home squadron.....but is OPCON to the deployed wing.

[Eclipse]

(We're not talking about ADCON.)

It would be an interesting situation if an IC in another wing put together a tasking that violated another wing or regions's supplement, though.
Another reason these things should not be allowed.  If, for example, dirt road landings are a bad idea in RMR, they are probably a bad idea
everywhere, otherwise, there's no reason for the supp.

I'm not sure this has ever come up in conversation in my parts, either philosophically or practically.  Might be an interesting wrinkle to add
to an eval.  (Like when they had us land at a grass field, but no one checked whether it was usable from an exercise perspective. 
Exercise-wise it was a mud-bog and we wound up losing the plane for the rest of the day.)

[Mike W]

I was just writing a reply as saw you beat me to it!

[lordmonar]

I was making the point that there is ADCON and OPCON and that we should be careful about blanket statements "a commander's authority ends at the border" is not a true statement.

There are times when it does extend across the border and times when it does not......depends on the situation.

As for 60-1 supps being different........60-1 states that the wing CC must list all dirt/grass airports where CAP aircraft are allowed to land at.......so this is going to happen.  If there is no supp then you can't land there.

Having said that......on the subject of regulations and when and how you can deviate from the written instructions........in the case of being ordered to land there contrary to a regional supplement.....the onus would not be on the pilot who followed the order but the IC who ordered it to happen.

Especially in a "one time special situation".....i.e. picking up an aircrew who was stranded at a remote field.

As far as an EVAL point goes.......I don't like "gotcha" type scenarios.   If the scenario is driving you to work/land at an airfield that is not on the list.....who is to blame?  Planning for sending you there.  Air Ops for not double checking?  Ops?  Safety?  The PIC?

[Eclipse]

As for 60-1 supps being different........60-1 states that the wing CC must list all dirt/grass airports where CAP aircraft are allowed to land at.......so this is going to happen.  If there is no supp then you can't land there.

Not quite.

That only applies to unlisted airfields.  All FAA-listed airfields are approved as a matter of course.
In my wing, there are soft-field FAA strips all over the place, in fact we run an annual flight bivouac at one.
No special approval is needed for these.

CAPR 60-3
b. Only civilian airports in the current FAA Airport/Facility Directory and military
airfields (if approved by the military organization supported during a supervised mission or by
CAP-USAF LR for all other flights) are authorized for CAP aircraft. Unlisted civilian airfields
may be approved by a wing or higher commander with written permission from the airfield
owner/operator. For CAP-USAF LR approvals, advance notice of 5 days (corporate aircraft) or
45 days (member owned or furnished aircraft) is required to obtain a military airfield approval in
the CAP-USAF LR where that airfield is located.

But that's different from having a supp that prohibits dirt road strip landings.

And in this case, RMR does >not< actually prohibit landing on a dirt road, per se:
http://www.capmembers.com/media/cms/RMR_Supplement_to_CAPR_601__9_Nov_1_D841E52993D9A.pdf
2-2b. CAP Aircraft can only operate on paved runways. Exceptions for operation on dirt, gravel
or turf runways must have the RMR/CC approval prior to operating on unpaved runways.
Waivers will expire annually and will need to be re-submitted for approval to the RMR/CC.
Waivers will be posted on the RMR Web site, http://rmrcap.org .

So for some reason RMR requires explicit approval for soft-field airfields, but NHQ does not.

And neither applies in this case as a "dirt road" isn't an airfield to start with.  Honestly,
I'd say that something like that has a pretty high ORM, and I don't know that it should be authorized
at all, and probably should be a Regional or National call. In the case of Fossett, those people
were probably all in the room or on the phone.

As far as an EVAL point goes.......I don't like "gotcha" type scenarios.   If the scenario is driving you to work/land at an airfield that is not on the list.....who is to blame?  Planning for sending you there.  Air Ops for not double checking?  Ops?  Safety?  The PIC?

Probably a little of everyone, and certainly shows a lack of ORM.  The eval was around a scenario that involved major flooding in the area, so it's not only reasonable,
but expected.  Likely in a real-world, the pilots would have seen the issue from the air, or the person waiting to be picked up would have

[lordmonar]

When did we start talking about dirt roads?