July 05, 2020, 08:54:47 pm

Recent posts

Pages 1 2 3 4 ... 10
11
The Lobby / Re: Where in regulation are CA...
Last post by Eclipse - July 02, 2020, 07:09:27 pm
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/programs/emergency-services/aircraft-operations/standardization-and-evaluation

"Change Notice: CAP Standards (CAPS) for flying operations became effective on 31 Mar 20 and are available under Members > Publication Library > Standards.  CAPS 71-series addresses standardization of training.  CAP 72-series addresses program standards (see additional information provided below).  CAPS 73-series addresses standardization of operational procedures.  Examinations that support the Form 5 process (e.g., the CAPR 70-1 General Exam and all the category-specific examinations (Powered, Balloon, Glider, and sUAS) and the Orientation Pilot quizzes), are currently available within AXIS.  Aircraft questionnaires (CAPF 70-5QA/B/G) and evaluation forms (CAPF 70-5A/B/G) supporting the Form 5 are available at Members > Publication Library > Forms."

https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/S072_003_D49277B04A9F2.pdf

"CAPR 70-1 is Now Effective!
MARCH 31, 2020

The revised CAPR 70-1, CAP Flight Management, became effective on 31 March 20 along with its associated publications (e.g., 70-series CAPS and CAPF documents).  These publications can be found in the CAP Publication Library.  Publication of CAP Standards in the 70-series will be driving major changes to the Aircraft Operations web pages.  Training syllabi such as National Flight Academy, G1000 Transition, or Proficiency Profiles that were either here, on Ops Quals, or published as pamphlets have been placed in category-specific CAPS 71-series Aircrew Training documents.  More noticeably, program information previously disseminated informally on this site has been replaced by formally published CAP Standards and forms.  Examples include: Mission Symbols (now CAPS 72-2), Aircraft Checklists (now CAPS 72-3), Aircraft Information Files (CAPS 72-4), Preflight Risk Assessment Worksheets (CAPF 70-1/1G), and Flight Release Checklists (CAPF 70-2/2G).  Procedural guidance once spread across this site (Post-Flight Checklists, Sterile Cockpit, Electronic Flight Bag procedures, etc.) has been consolidated into category-specific CAPS 73-series Operations Procedures documents.  Training on the content of these changes is available at Aircraft Operations > Change Communications."


The "regulation" you seek is CAPR 70-1, which refers to the CAPS publications as the respective "standard".

https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/media/cms/R_070001_C72108C0E2F06.pdf
12
The Lobby / Re: Where in regulation are CA...
Last post by Holding Pattern - July 02, 2020, 06:59:53 pm
Quote from: baronet68 on July 02, 2020, 06:32:19 pm
Quote from: Holding Pattern on July 02, 2020, 05:27:27 pmhttps://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/members/publications/standards

What sort of publication is this defined as?

Looks like standards are mentioned under the definition of what a regulation is:

Quote from: CAPR 1-2, Attachment 3 - Terms:Regulation - a publication issued at the national level that directs actions and prescribes standards to
meet a policy's intent or implement management practices. Regulations also present rules designed to
govern or control a procedure, behavior or conduct.

Since most of these standards are operations related, I looked at CAPR 70-1 and found it to be filled with references to these numbered CAP standards.

The publication of separate standards makes perfect sense to me since those standards could be updated much easier than the process required to update a regulation.




While mentioned though, it isn't defined. Ideally since these appear to be publications for mandatory compliance of membership, those documents should be defined, just as we define what a regulation, pamphlet, and form are, how they are updated at each level, and how supplements are or aren't allowed for them.
13
Tools of the trade / Re: Mobiles not supported by N...
Last post by CAP9907 - July 02, 2020, 06:49:31 pm
Quote from: Eclipse on July 02, 2020, 04:29:51 pm
Quote from: BoxGranch on July 02, 2020, 02:43:36 pmNoun Mobile Radio-VHF may not be used as a base and a Noun Base Station-VHF

If this is, in fact, true, this is not only ridiculous, but will disable a significant amount
of the already struggling comms network.

I can't begin to imagine who would think this is a good idea, nor for that matter how it would be
enforceable or workable from a practical perspective.

Ah, but it is indeed true. I tried to request a replacement mobile antenna and mount for a Noun base radio that was already installed in a CAP van. Was told by NTC "negative, that radio is classed as a Noun
Mobile radio". Frustrating indeed.. the solution was shall we say creative, but within the rules and regs.

~9907
14
The Lobby / Re: Where in regulation are CA...
Last post by baronet68 - July 02, 2020, 06:32:19 pm
Quote from: Holding Pattern on July 02, 2020, 05:27:27 pmhttps://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/members/publications/standards

What sort of publication is this defined as?

Looks like standards are mentioned under the definition of what a regulation is:

Quote from: CAPR 1-2, Attachment 3 - Terms:Regulation - a publication issued at the national level that directs actions and prescribes standards to
meet a policy's intent or implement management practices. Regulations also present rules designed to
govern or control a procedure, behavior or conduct.

Since most of these standards are operations related, I looked at CAPR 70-1 and found it to be filled with references to these numbered CAP standards.

The publication of separate standards makes perfect sense to me since those standards could be updated much easier than the process required to update a regulation.


15
The Lobby / Re: Where in regulation are CA...
Last post by JohhnyD - July 02, 2020, 06:07:55 pm
In a million years, I would have never thought to ask that. having been asked, I scratch my head hoping someone can answer that.
16
Tools of the trade / Re: Mobiles not supported by N...
Last post by arajca - July 02, 2020, 06:02:37 pm
A simple solution is when you're replacing a mobile in a base station role, request a base station set.

17
The Lobby / Where in regulation are CAP "s...
Last post by Holding Pattern - July 02, 2020, 05:27:27 pm
https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/members/publications/standards

What sort of publication is this defined as?
18
Tools of the trade / Re: Mobiles not supported by N...
Last post by Eclipse - July 02, 2020, 04:29:51 pm
Quote from: BoxGranch on July 02, 2020, 02:43:36 pmNoun Mobile Radio-VHF may not be used as a base and a Noun Base Station-VHF

If this is, in fact, true, this is not only ridiculous, but will disable a significant amount
of the already struggling comms network.

I can't begin to imagine who would think this is a good idea, nor for that matter how it would be
enforceable or workable from a practical perspective.
19
Tools of the trade / Re: Mobiles not supported by N...
Last post by BoxGranch - July 02, 2020, 02:43:36 pm
As a group comm officer I would have appreciated some notice. I got none. Certainly there is nothing I could have done and I knew it was going to happen, but it would have been nice to be told beforehand. It would also have been nice to point out that the TA allows for some radios for IC and ICP use and kept them supported.

While parts are an issue, I think the plan to reduce the number of radios is the bigger reason. We are going from 2,401 mobiles to 1,059.

If you read the DOK presentation at the national conference in 2018, it was clear the only base and mobile VHF radios they are going to support in the long run will be in corporate vehicles and for IC's and ICP's.

The number of handhelds goes down by about 300, from 2,124 to 1,826 and I hear I will start losing support on the Johnson handhelds as well.

Elsewhere in the PowerPoint, the DOK mentions the possibility of reducing the number of repeaters by 50%.

The 2019 presentation didn't have much in the way of numbers and I have not found a 2020 update, but need to look again.

It sounds like I will have to turn in Johnsons to get Motorolas. The Johnsons will be used for ReadyOps. I had hoped to retain the Johnsons.

I am also hearing that a Noun Mobile Radio-VHF may not be used as a base and a Noun Base Station-VHF may not be used as a mobile. The later is not an issue as I have so few, but the former is an issue due wanting bases at my squadrons as well as co-located with HF radios which I am being encouraged to move to member homes.

Even if I can find money to get them fixed, there is going to be the FOUO issue with frequencies. The repair shop will have to be approved. So far, I have not found one. Should anyone know of such a place, please let me know.

Caveat, none of what I perceive is happening is written in stone other than the loss of support on all of my mobiles save the ones in vans. It is, however, what I am hearing from above and I was wondering if it is what is happening elsewhere. It seems that CAP underwent a dramatic restructure of communications with the requirement for NTIA compliant radios went into effect and is going through another with the current plan.
20
Uniforms & Awards / Re: My Recommendation for Rigg...
Last post by JC004 - July 02, 2020, 05:29:15 am
Yes, I found them excellent for duty gear.  Also very good for people who need to carry tools.  I have a second one for non-CAP use.

Usually rigger belts can be in the $40-60 range, so this WOLF brand is a steal for the construction quality. 

I am less satisfied with the SPEC-OPS brand sand belt for the ABU.  It's good.  It's just not great.  Fairly thick, but gets creased fairly easily (the WOLF doesn't).  That said, I still recommend the SPEC-OPS for people who need an ABU rigger belt, over the issue, Vanguard, and others I've tried.  Unfortunately, the WOLF "tan" is a Coyote belt for the OCP uniform.  If we get OCP, I'll be using a WOLF.

Polo shirt with grey BDU pants from Tru-Spec (the Propper grey was too light to be a medium grey), and WOLF black rigger belt.  Blueberry suit with the WOLF.  ABU with the SPEC-OPS.

I don't know what brand the "tactical" grey pants Vanguard sells are, but the Tru-Spec BDU pants are excellent in grey.  I've been giving out $10 referral coupons to people left and right to get grey BDU pants from Tactical Gear (or blueberries, or flight suits because the Vanguard blue flight suit is AWFUL - horrible material and construction...by Rothco).  $50 (BOOO!) for grey tactical pants from Vanguard.  With the coupon I send out, it's like $19 for Tru-Spec grey BDU pants from TG.

Update: It appears Vanguard is selling Tru-Spec tactical pants (their 24/7 line of products).  Still overpriced with very limited sizes available from Vanguard.  Tactical Gear all the way.  Galls is good, but they use FEDEX "SmartPost" (which is basically like sending them by walking courier), and I don't think I can give people $10 coupons for Galls. Tactical Gear customer service rocks too.  UPS lost my patrol cap package, so Tactical Gear sent a replacement by overnight shipping for free - no waiting, no investigation with UPS, no UPS claims process, no charge at all - even for the overnight.
Pages 1 2 3 4 ... 10