When member's of CAP's numerous "flying clubs" are flying CAP aircraft on their own (e.g. paying for it), do most wings now require (as a policy) that the aircraft constantly monitor CAP RADIO "GUARD 1" to ensure the aircraft can be called back to home base or alerted to respond to an area for a mission?
My impression is that flying club members don't even turn on the CAP radio when they are flying on their dime.
RM
IIRC, in CAWG there is an Ops Directive that requires the CAP radio and 121.5 be monitored anytime that a CAP aircraft is in the air. As a matter of course, I monitor 121.5 whenever I am flying my own aircraft. Be surprised how many ELTs I have reported over the years.
I don't know that I've ever heard of a CAP aircraft being recalled from a proficiency flight while in the air for any reason, nor can I think of a time where it would have been necessary.
I suppose there is that 1 in a million chance, but I think its safe to say that most CAP proficiency flights are so short that the chances that this would make any real difference in how fast the plane got back home and ready to fly a sortie is quite low, unless the plane just took off and was within a few minutes of the airport.
Heck, most of the time there isn't going to be a CAP member close enough to a CAP radio to try to call them anyway. I can think of maybe a handful of people in my Wing who have CAP radios at their house that might be able to call back a plane. Everyone else is going to have to drive to CAPHQ and fire up something there and by the the time they do that, the plane is probably back on the ground or on the way home anyway.
But, in any case, it is probably a good practice.
RiverAux: I generally would agree with you. The chances of someone on a proficiency flight being recalled is pretty slim. However, in CAWG, we have a mission down along the Mexican border which sometimes requires CAP crews to spend as much as four hours in transit from their home airports to the border site and vice versa. On a number of occasions, we have had one of our planes diverted to search for an ELT or a crash site, because a person on the ground was aware that the planes were enroute. Not frequent, but it has occurred.
Still a good idea to monitor the radio: it is good practice at any rate.
Well, in that case they are on a mission and I would hope that monitoring the CAP radio would be standard for that. I was responding to the original post about proficiency flying.
If you needed to contact a CAP aircraft that is not monitoring the CAP radios all you have to do is ask the FAA if they are working with CAPFLIGHT XXXX and ask them to pass a message for them to contact whoever. The FAA does this all the time.
Quote from: PHall on October 04, 2009, 03:37:35 AM
If you needed to contact a CAP aircraft that is not monitoring the CAP radios all you have to do is ask the FAA if they are working with CAPFLIGHT XXXX and ask them to pass a message for them to contact whoever. The FAA does this all the time.
I agree with what you saying above as far as an alternative to the CAP radio monitoring. HOWEVER, every AF unit that has planes flying (even for proficiency flying) still has the requirement for the aircraft to monitor the appropriate Command Post or NORAD control channel for immediate contact.
I might add that this policy is more of instilling the proper mindset in all CAP pilots that they are operating an AF supported/funded aircraft subject to immediate recall or even dispatch to assist in an emergency. It it not a rental aircraft they have for X hours >:(
The policy on the use of the new CAP GUARD channel should really keep communications activity on that channel very low as opposed to past practices that subjected pilots to lots of comm activity on the former channels.
RM
Quote from: RADIOMAN015 on October 04, 2009, 02:24:28 PM
I agree with what you saying above as far as an alternative to the CAP radio monitoring. HOWEVER, every AF unit that has planes flying (even for proficiency flying) still has the requirement for the aircraft to monitor the appropriate Command Post or NORAD control channel for immediate contact. RM
They did that in SAC. But then SAC was really, really big on "Command and Control". But MAC, AMC, TAC and ACC sure didn't/don't.
The one frequency they do monitor is UHF GUARD (243.0 MHz). And that's only because the UHF radios have seperate Guard receivers built in.
In INWG it is policy to monitor guard. We had an ELT mission come up while a bird was in the air(proficiency flight) and it could not be raised. Whether the volume was down or the VHF broke or what ever the aircraft could not be raised and another one had to be launched to cover the mission.
Quote from: davidsinn on October 04, 2009, 04:18:06 PM
In INWG it is policy to monitor guard. We had an ELT mission come up while a bird was in the air(proficiency flight) and it could not be raised. Whether the volume was down or the VHF broke or what ever the aircraft could not be raised and another one had to be launched to cover the mission.
Did you even try to contact the aircraft through air traffic control?
Quote from: PHall on October 04, 2009, 05:16:17 PM
Quote from: davidsinn on October 04, 2009, 04:18:06 PM
In INWG it is policy to monitor guard. We had an ELT mission come up while a bird was in the air(proficiency flight) and it could not be raised. Whether the volume was down or the VHF broke or what ever the aircraft could not be raised and another one had to be launched to cover the mission.
Did you even try to contact the aircraft through air traffic control?
I don't know. I am paraphrasing an email the WG/CC sent out emphasizing the importance of monitoring the radios when in the air.