Mission Pilot Shortage?

[etodd]

Lots of pilots whose MP status has lapsed.  So many members have gotten busy with 'other things' during all this COVID downtime. Are we seeing a trend of pilots just too busy elsewhere to re-up their F91?

Have you been asking your local pilots whose F91 has run out, about their future plans? Don't just assume everyone will re-up.

I'm sure it will vary greatly by Wings, but would be interesting to see the national trends. We may need quite a few new pilots if there are that many falling off.

[Eclipse]

Membership is down 20+% year over year, with a lot more empty shirts riding out their last check
and / or evaluating whether it's worth sticking around solely based on sunk cost.

The organizaiton is going to need new everything, and with the current state of basically no missions
and empty rosters, this is probably a 5-year fix (after things get to back to "normal").

People may well re-engage, but pilots with no stick time for two years and lapsed quals aren't going to
ramp up overnight, assuming they have any money left to get their proficiency back after spending their
EIP Checks.

Another summer of (at least) a shortage of the once-a-year flying clubs Aviation Academies and a general shortage of Stan Eval pilots coupled with the coming inflation, not to mention many programs that have, or will shortly, significantly change, is going to mean more crickets then cold starts.

[NIN]

We're not doing poorly here. Sure, we've lost a few mission pilots and VFR pilots, but we've been recruiting as well. One of my squadrons just recruited three female pilots in the same week.

We have real world missions we're flying, which keeps our pilot corps engaged.

Could I use more MPs and check pilots? Sure. I doubt people ever say "I have too many mission pilots..."

[farsightusf2017]

We're not doing poorly here. Sure, we've lost a few mission pilots and VFR pilots, but we've been recruiting as well. One of my squadrons just recruited three female pilots in the same week.

We have real world missions we're flying, which keeps our pilot corps engaged.

Could I use more MPs and check pilots? Sure. I doubt people ever say "I have too many mission pilots..."

Sadly I have definitely heard units say "we have too many pilots, maybe focus on a different qual"

My experience has been overall membership reduction but for the most part it hasn't been pilots, mostly members who weren't heavily involved in ops or Cadet programs

[JohhnyD]

Our membership is up 9% year over year, we have more pilots this year and are flying regularly o-flights and training missions. We added two CFIs this last 12 months and more are talking to us.

Engage, engage, engage!

[JohhnyD]

We're not doing poorly here. Sure, we've lost a few mission pilots and VFR pilots, but we've been recruiting as well. One of my squadrons just recruited three female pilots in the same week.

Engagement works!

Are you seeing any NCO activity in your Wing?

[Holding Pattern]

COVID rules and additional wing barriers meant we let more people and quals lapse. At this point I think everyone is just waiting for change to happen or walking away.

[Spam]

My perspective since I took command again last fall:

My prioritization for the first two AFAM training missions in virus recovery efforts has been aircrew renewals and proficiency. I put in my commanders guidance last Thanksgiving for our first (virtual ICP/reopening) SAREX that we would first focus on pilot proficiency, then mission requals, and only then expand to new crew training. We're about to have our fourth SAREX since November this Saturday. We've finally opened up to new trainees, and they feedback I've gotten from my commanders and while visiting my units is that they appreciated the crawl/walk/run approach to make sure our SET designated people knock the rust off first. The DO also just ran a flight clinic and gave check rides three weekends ago, so we're doing ok here in Georgia. Just like we would do pre-deployment workups in the Navy, we are doing workups here in GAWG, gradually adding operational urgency (e.g. wheels up at 0730 not 0930) as we move from a permissive training environment allowing people to learn skills at their pace, to practicing TTPs at an operationally representative pace.

I've permanently grounded one pilot, and we've temporarily grounded another. I hated it, but the airmanship standards issue is a serious one and I think (from subjective comments I get) the true volunteer professional pilots we have appreciate when we discipline ourselves. So: numbers of pilots and MPs is not the goal in and of itself - quality is, because quality attracts quality, and setting the bar high establishes expectations for future success.

The upshot across my units is, we haven't lost any mission rated pilots to non-health reasons, and have several MP trainees awaiting turns in the cockpit, working towards check rides. We are putting some of them up in the aircraft on SAT.  

But I sure am getting an earful about PD, and road blocks with Level I and II completion... the biggest roadblock to onboarding pilots is these stupid new processes and VolU roadblocks. But thats another thread...

R/s
Spam

PS, there's probably an equally serious thread offering here for decay in Ground Team (interest, skills, ratings). I hate to say this also, but CAP GT is a specialty that is dying and closer to death than I've ever seen it since the early '80s when i joined (and earned my GTM rating). When the number one GT unit in my Wing decides they'd rather work a VFW car show than field a team to a SAREX, and we cancel all the planned GT events, then I know we've lost the impetus to keep a failing mission capability alive. 

[Eclipse]

I hate to say this also, but CAP GT is a specialty that is dying and closer to death than I've ever seen it since the early '80s when i joined (and earned my GTM rating).

Absent a revitalized set of missions, I think this ship has sailed.

Between the lack of need, and the way CAP lets anyone participate regardless of quals,
I can't imagine why anyone would bother with this other then the general fieldcraft
skills, and for better or worse that's really not a CAP "thing".

I've been involved in a few legit DAs, and there was really zero need to know how to dig a latrine,
set up an LZ, carry a litter, or even camp for that matter.

Walking around in the typical weather incident in full battle rattle just makes you look like
an airsofter who got lost during the storm.

[RiverAux]

GT should be rebranded as Ground Search and Rescue Team member for that group of activities and then have some other designation for all the other misc. ground missions that might be done on occasion.

[Jester]

GT should be rebranded as Ground Search and Rescue Team member for that group of activities and then have some other designation for all the other misc. ground missions that might be done on occasion.

Or provide a prescribed mission set for a GT and/or group of GTs with a METL specifying the collective tasks needed to fulfill those mission sets.  We focus almost entirely on individual tasks and that's a big mistake.

[Eclipse]

GT should be rebranded as Ground Search and Rescue Team member for that group of activities and then have some other designation for all the other misc. ground missions that might be done on occasion.

Or provide a prescribed mission set for a GT and/or group of GTs with a METL specifying the collective tasks needed to fulfill those mission sets.  We focus almost entirely on individual tasks and that's a big mistake.

Agree 100%, but in order to do that, you first have to identify your customer and make strategic
decisions and about what your capabilities are, and more importantly aren't.

The organization has been historically adverse to the latter - much easier to be "all things to everyone"
and then just not be able to do anything.

[N6RVT]

GT should be rebranded as Ground Search and Rescue Team member for that group of activities and then have some other designation for all the other misc. ground missions that might be done on occasion.

CAP should drop its own standards for ground team and use the actual FEMA ones that actual government agencies recognize. https://rtlt.preptoolkit.fema.gov/Public/Resource/ViewFile/8-508-1173?type=Pdf&p=11

NASAR is a non-government activity that issues ratings like CAP does, but in their case they guarantee that it means you have the FEMA recognized skill set to back it up.  They did a pitch to CAP for us to use their system and there was at least some interest in doing that ads the pitch they made is on the national website.

Tell the sheriff department you have a FEMA 508-1 rating and they might use you.  Tell them you are CERT and they probably will.  Tell them you are both and they may well put you officially in charge of other people.

Tell them you have a CAP rating and they will politely tell you they don't know what that is, what it means or qualifies you for.

Incidentally the other service Auxiliary does not have this problem as the parent service (USCG) issues the ES ratings themselves.

[N6RVT]

Lots of pilots whose MP status has lapsed.  So many members have gotten busy with 'other things' during all this COVID downtime. Are we seeing a trend of pilots just too busy elsewhere to re-up their F91? Have you been asking your local pilots whose F91 has run out, about their future plans? Don't just assume everyone will re-up.  I'm sure it will vary greatly by Wings, but would be interesting to see the national trends. We may need quite a few new pilots if there are that many falling off.

Got to 89.9 hours before I failed the medical.  I tried.

[JohhnyD]

We are activly recruiting pilots. We have plenty for now, but we look to the future....