Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
July 24, 2014, 12:57:54 PM
Home Help Login Register
News:

CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: How many hours a year does the typical CAP plane fly?
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Pages: [1] 2  All Print
Author Topic: How many hours a year does the typical CAP plane fly?  (Read 1662 times)
simon
Seasoned Member

Posts: 246

« on: July 26, 2011, 02:09:46 AM »

This is a follow on from the post about pilot hours.

Since the satellites no longer listen on 121.5, flying hours have decreased. How many hours are the planes in your Wing flying?

Here are the numbers for California (July 2010 to June 2011):

Total Hours Wing Wide: 5,062
Aircraft Median: 185

334   N968CP
264   N887CP
262   N718CP
247   N206JK
236   N97099
232   N451CP
228   N743CP
216   N5524H
209   N9815H
204   N809CP
198   N7304N
197   N4603N
190   N948CP
186   N441SP
183   N265HP
169   N9420R
160   N4810N
153   N50MB
150   N285CP
149   N9554G
141   N9353E
133   N4646H
130   N9538E
108   N9450E
104   N8280E
102   N6183E
101   N313CP
77   N7598Z

(Aircraft excluded)
0   N4877N
0   N96658
Logged
Mark_Wheeler
Member

Posts: 70

« Reply #1 on: July 26, 2011, 02:38:22 AM »

Just as a little bit of info for the last plane, N7598Z is currently the C-206 that is back east getting the glass cockpit refurbishment, so it hasn't exactly been in a position to be getting a lot of flying time. However, I'm proud to see that my squadron's airplane (N968CP) is as high on the list as it is!

Mark
Logged
coudano
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 968

« Reply #2 on: July 26, 2011, 08:43:41 AM »

There may also be some (possibly) misleading figures as well
for example, there are some airplanes that go to TWO cadet flight academies

That's probably 40 hours at each academy,
plus ferry to there and back (twice)

And that's 100 hours so you get a whole mx rotation out of it too...


So if you subtract the 100 hours of flight academy off the plane,
its total hours flown in a year (like by your unit's pilots) might be lower than you thought
Logged
JC004
[Insert Cool Title Here]
Global Moderator

Posts: 3,895

« Reply #3 on: July 26, 2011, 10:04:13 AM »

What is the % difference from before the satellite shut-off?
Logged
davidsinn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,018
Unit: GLR-IN-227

« Reply #4 on: July 26, 2011, 10:51:35 AM »

This is a follow on from the post about pilot hours.

Since the satellites no longer listen on 121.5, flying hours have decreased. How many hours are the planes in your Wing flying?

Here are the numbers for California (July 2010 to June 2011):

Total Hours Wing Wide: 5,062
Aircraft Median: 185

334   N968CP
264   N887CP
262   N718CP
247   N206JK
236   N97099
232   N451CP
228   N743CP
216   N5524H
209   N9815H
204   N809CP
198   N7304N
197   N4603N
190   N948CP
186   N441SP
183   N265HP
169   N9420R
160   N4810N
153   N50MB
150   N285CP
149   N9554G
141   N9353E
133   N4646H
130   N9538E
108   N9450E
104   N8280E
102   N6183E
101   N313CP
77   N7598Z

(Aircraft excluded)
0   N4877N
0   N96658

That's some crappy aircraft utilization. Only ten out of 28 aircraft got the required 200 hrs and yet one got more than 150% of the required hours. Don't you rotate your aircraft around?
Logged
Eclipse
Too Much Free Time Award
***
Posts: 23,049

« Reply #5 on: July 26, 2011, 10:55:04 AM »

How many hours are the planes in your Wing flying?

At least 200 per, with an active rotation program.

The last it was discussed in my presence, the minimum to be unconcerned about losing a respective plane was 200 hour per frame, not on average.
I understood that to be a national thing.  Is that just my region?
Logged

"Effort" does not equal "results".
PHall
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,135

« Reply #6 on: July 26, 2011, 11:17:19 AM »

This is a follow on from the post about pilot hours.

Since the satellites no longer listen on 121.5, flying hours have decreased. How many hours are the planes in your Wing flying?

Here are the numbers for California (July 2010 to June 2011):

Total Hours Wing Wide: 5,062
Aircraft Median: 185

334   N968CP
264   N887CP
262   N718CP
247   N206JK
236   N97099
232   N451CP
228   N743CP
216   N5524H
209   N9815H
204   N809CP
198   N7304N
197   N4603N
190   N948CP
186   N441SP
183   N265HP
169   N9420R
160   N4810N
153   N50MB
150   N285CP
149   N9554G
141   N9353E
133   N4646H
130   N9538E
108   N9450E
104   N8280E
102   N6183E
101   N313CP
77   N7598Z

(Aircraft excluded)
0   N4877N
0   N96658

That's some crappy aircraft utilization. Only ten out of 28 aircraft got the required 200 hrs and yet one got more than 150% of the required hours. Don't you rotate your aircraft around?

No they don't. If the unit an aircraft is assigned to can get the required 200 hours a year and doesn't abuse it enough to get it taken away from them, then most aircraft tend to stay there for years.
Logged
davidsinn
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 3,018
Unit: GLR-IN-227

« Reply #7 on: July 26, 2011, 12:06:45 PM »

This is a follow on from the post about pilot hours.

Since the satellites no longer listen on 121.5, flying hours have decreased. How many hours are the planes in your Wing flying?

Here are the numbers for California (July 2010 to June 2011):

Total Hours Wing Wide: 5,062
Aircraft Median: 185

334   N968CP
264   N887CP
262   N718CP
247   N206JK
236   N97099
232   N451CP
228   N743CP
216   N5524H
209   N9815H
204   N809CP
198   N7304N
197   N4603N
190   N948CP
186   N441SP
183   N265HP
169   N9420R
160   N4810N
153   N50MB
150   N285CP
149   N9554G
141   N9353E
133   N4646H
130   N9538E
108   N9450E
104   N8280E
102   N6183E
101   N313CP
77   N7598Z

(Aircraft excluded)
0   N4877N
0   N96658

That's some crappy aircraft utilization. Only ten out of 28 aircraft got the required 200 hrs and yet one got more than 150% of the required hours. Don't you rotate your aircraft around?

No they don't. If the unit an aircraft is assigned to can get the required 200 hours a year and doesn't abuse it enough to get it taken away from them, then most aircraft tend to stay there for years.

The requirement is 200/yr/airframe. How is it they still have 28 airplanes? We fly the wings off ours here and only have eight. Last year we had the second highest CD hours right after CAWG with only 30% of the aircraft.
Logged
FW
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,749

« Reply #8 on: July 26, 2011, 12:22:31 PM »

How many hours are the planes in your Wing flying?

At least 200 per, with an active rotation program.

The last it was discussed in my presence, the minimum to be unconcerned about losing a respective plane was 200 hour per frame, not on average.
I understood that to be a national thing.  Is that just my region?

The requirement is 200 hrs/airframe average per region.  Aircraft are allocated based on a formula which is highly complex and determined by a group of members we keep locked up; only to be released once a year to figure out which region gets which aircraft.   The region commander gets to decide how many aircraft in the allocation go to each wing.  Wing commanders are responsible to get the maximum use of each aircraft assigned.  After another year, the process begins anew.  ::)
Logged
Col. Fred Weiss, CAP
Been there: 1999-2003
Done that: 2005-2009
Got the Tshirts:1967-1972
                        1982-2014
Al Sayre
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,247
Unit: SER-MS-001

Mississippi Wing
« Reply #9 on: July 26, 2011, 12:39:56 PM »

The Wing aircraft assignment formula now includes Area in Sq Miles, so states with a very large area will have a proportionally larger number of aircraft assigned.  Although this isn't the only factor it is necessarily weighted fairly heavily.  If you want to spend some time with the search button, I know the actual formula was posted here within the last 24 months...

Edit:  Here is the thread:  http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=9768.20
« Last Edit: July 26, 2011, 12:46:26 PM by Al Sayre » Logged
Lt Col Al Sayre
MS Wing Staff Dude
Admiral, Great Navy of the State of Nebraska
GRW #2787
simon
Seasoned Member

Posts: 246

« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2011, 12:44:04 PM »

Quote
What is the % difference from before the satellite shut-off?

Excellent question. I don't know. I will see if I can find out.

BTW, the aircraft tail numbers ending in "CP" are 182 G1000's. 1/3rd of CA's fleet of 28 active aircraft are G1000. I was going to say that the G1000's seem to be on top of the flying heap, but you will see, not always. Also, I did note there are a couple of facts behind the planes that belie the statistics. For example, N313CP did not fly after November because it was moved to Washington. So if it were flown the whole year it would be 240 hours, not 101. But there are only 3-4 examples like this.
Logged
cap235629
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,246

« Reply #11 on: July 26, 2011, 12:56:51 PM »

Quote
What is the % difference from before the satellite shut-off?

Excellent question. I don't know. I will see if I can find out.

BTW, the aircraft tail numbers ending in "CP" are 182 G1000's. 1/3rd of CA's fleet of 28 active aircraft are G1000. I was going to say that the G1000's seem to be on top of the flying heap, but you will see, not always. Also, I did note there are a couple of facts behind the planes that belie the statistics. For example, N313CP did not fly after November because it was moved to Washington. So if it were flown the whole year it would be 240 hours, not 101. But there are only 3-4 examples like this.

Not every plane that ends in CP is a G-1000.  CP has been the last two digits on all CAP planes for at least the last 5 years.
Logged
Bill Hobbs, Major, CAP
Arkansas Certified Emergency Manager
Arkansas Wing Director of Communications
Emergency Services Officer
83rd Composite Squadron
Fort Smith, Arkansas
jimmydeanno
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 4,141
Unit: ǝnƃoɹ

« Reply #12 on: July 26, 2011, 01:26:11 PM »

Last year at NSC the reported flying hours difference between the satellite shut-off and current use was an increase in hours flown because of alternative missions like damage assessment, CD, HLS, etc. 
Logged
If you have ten thousand regulations you destroy all respect for the law. - Winston Churchill
simon
Seasoned Member

Posts: 246

« Reply #13 on: July 26, 2011, 01:33:53 PM »

Quote
The Wing aircraft assignment formula now includes Area in Sq Miles, so states with a very large area will have a proportionally larger number of aircraft assigned.  Although this isn't the only factor it is necessarily weighted fairly heavily.

Interesting. The Redding plane covers about 30,000 square miles of Northern California, most of it remote and mountainous. The LA basin is about 4000 square miles with 8 aircraft. Must be a rule of thumb formula.
Logged
JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,156

« Reply #14 on: July 26, 2011, 01:44:06 PM »

Quote
The Wing aircraft assignment formula now includes Area in Sq Miles, so states with a very large area will have a proportionally larger number of aircraft assigned.  Although this isn't the only factor it is necessarily weighted fairly heavily.

Interesting. The Redding plane covers about 30,000 square miles of Northern California, most of it remote and mountainous. The LA basin is about 4000 square miles with 8 aircraft. Must be a rule of thumb formula.
The formula, as I understand it, assigns aircraft to regions.  Below that level, it's up to the guys with birds on their shoulders to decide where to allocate them.
Logged
simon
Seasoned Member

Posts: 246

« Reply #15 on: July 26, 2011, 01:47:05 PM »

Quote
Not every plane that ends in CP is a G-1000.  CP has been the last two digits on all CAP planes for at least the last 5 years.

Granted, but in a quick of scan tail numbers, it is probably a good indication. All 182's have been G1000's for the last 7 years. The last 6 for 172's. I'd venture to say those two models make up 95% of the fleet.

Unless of course CAP special ordered round dial 172's/182's after the G1000 came out. Did we?
Logged
JeffDG
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 2,156

« Reply #16 on: July 26, 2011, 01:49:43 PM »

Quote
Not every plane that ends in CP is a G-1000.  CP has been the last two digits on all CAP planes for at least the last 5 years.

Granted, but in a quick of scan tail numbers, it is probably a good indication. All 182's have been G1000's for the last 7 years. The last 6 for 172's. I'd venture to say those two models make up 95% of the fleet.

Unless of course CAP special ordered round dial 172's/182's after the G1000 came out. Did we?
Not sure, but I know we (TN) have at least 2 "CP" aircraft that are not G1000, one 172 and one 182 (it's even a "T" model, but round dial).  We also have an aircraft that is a 182T/G1000 and not "CP".
Logged
simon
Seasoned Member

Posts: 246

« Reply #17 on: July 26, 2011, 02:05:38 PM »

Fair enough. I stand corrected.
Logged
simon
Seasoned Member

Posts: 246

« Reply #18 on: July 26, 2011, 02:22:35 PM »

Quote
The Wing aircraft assignment formula now includes Area in Sq Miles, so states with a very large area will have a proportionally larger number of aircraft assigned.  Although this isn't the only factor it is necessarily weighted fairly heavily.  If you want to spend some time with the search button, I know the actual formula was posted here within the last 24 months...

Edit:  Here is the thread:  http://captalk.net/index.php?topic=9768.20


Very interesting thread with some good points posted (Amongst the flaming).

One in particular that I thought was enlightening:

"I know that it is common practice in my Wing to rotate planes in and out of the units that do the most flying from those that do the least so as to put as many hours on each airframe as possible.  If it weren't for this little shell game that is played in every Wing, I think we would have a much better idea of where there is a strong need for an aircraft (or even multiple aircraft) vs where we just can't support one."

If Wings really do this, then the number of hours flown out of each squadron would be a better indication of the necessity for an aircraft than the number of hours put on an airframe.

Now that the G1000's are around, who has noticed that squadron members are VERY protective about "their" aircraft being rotated out?...
Logged
EMT-83
Salty & Seasoned Contributor

Posts: 1,603

« Reply #19 on: July 26, 2011, 02:57:24 PM »

"I know that it is common practice in my Wing to rotate planes in and out of the units that do the most flying from those that do the least so as to put as many hours on each airframe as possible.  If it weren't for this little shell game that is played in every Wing, I think we would have a much better idea of where there is a strong need for an aircraft (or even multiple aircraft) vs where we just can't support one."

If Wings really do this, then the number of hours flown out of each squadron would be a better indication of the necessity for an aircraft than the number of hours put on an airframe.

Itís not a shell game at all; but an appropriate use of resources. Donít worry, the Wing DO knows which units are flying and which arenít.

Now that the G1000's are around, who has noticed that squadron members are VERY protective about "their" aircraft being rotated out?...

Whatís to be protective about? Sorry, itís a corporate asset.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2  All Print 
CAP Talk  |  Operations  |  Aviation & Flying Activities  |  Topic: How many hours a year does the typical CAP plane fly?
 


Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP SMF 2.0.7 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.698 seconds with 25 queries.