Payment Required for Initial Form 5?

[Turk]

We have a member who is expressing some indignation over having to pay for her initial Form 5. 

Do members in fact have to pay for their initial Form 5? Where izzit in the regs - I can't find any reference to that.

Also, if she DOES have to pay for an initial Form 5 - must she do so in every aircraft category? We have 172s and 182s in my Wing.

[Eclipse]

Yes, and yes.

Initials are on the member's dime, recurrency is on the corporation, within the program's guidelines.

[sparks]

Adding another note to Eclipse's correct reply, future CAPF5's might be paid for depending on the amount of funding the wing has available. For many years I paid for every check ride I took because of funding limitations. It was considered normal. If this person is balking at paying for a check ride does that mean they won't fly a CAP aircraft unless the wing/cooperate is paying for it?

[FW]

A CAP pilot can not be reimbursed for a CAPF 5 flight unless the pilot is mission qualified (either a TMP or MP)  That's the rule as far as reimbursement from national is concerned  (it's considered an "A" mission).  However, if a unit has the funds, the unit can pay for the evaluation.  This goes for initial ride and subsequent annual rides.  Of course, because of budget limitations, a mission pilot should only expect 1 "free" form 5 ride per year.  (you can also get a paid ride if you're a cadet O'flight  pilot)

[es_g0d]

Members who balk at "paying" to fly corporate aircraft need to take a second look at why they want to fly for CAP in the first place.  If you're not willing to put your wallet where your mouth is, we can find other opportunities for you that won't "cost extra."  I'm always amazed at the expectation of "free" flying, and members that will show up at funded activities and nothing else.  If you can't afford to pay for your yearly evaluation, how can I expect you to also pay for your own proficiency flying?  Quite simply if there is NO expectation of "free" flying then that's probably where you need to be.  You're getting a "free" instructor on that flight; and that time is costly elsewhere!  When necessary, I've paid for my own form 5s -- and not just the initial.  On one occasion I was lucky enough to get a recurrent evaluation paid at a wing activity.  Because I had gone non-current following a PCS move, there was some speculation as to whether or not it would be paid.  Several members were aghast, "you know you are going to have to pay for that ride, right?"  My attitude was, "maybe so!  I just feel lucky that I got to fly today."

Just feeling lucky that you get to fly ... what ever happened to THAT!?

[Turk]

Thank ye, gents, for the speedy and expert advice.

Does anyone know where in the regs all this is, cuz [darn] me if I can find it. She'll ask, too. 

[wingnut55]

I agree with ES_God

Kind of cheep to expect CAP is going to pay for your form 5 Flight time. Our aircraft time is cheap, about $50 dollars before fuel costs. Looking at the budget for 2009 CAP/USAF is going to pay less. Not to mention, no more ELT false hits (well far, far fewer)

[DG]

Thank you Fred W. and Scott L. for taking the time and interest to share your insights and understanding.

[Ricochet13]

I agree with ES_God
Kind of cheep to expect CAP is going to pay for your form 5 Flight time. Our aircraft time is cheap, about $50 dollars before fuel costs. Looking at the budget for 2009 CAP/USAF is going to pay less. Not to mention, no more ELT false hits (well far, far fewer)

I avoid the issue by using my own aircraft.  But I'm fortunate to still have my 172.  Worth every penny I pay though. 

[Eclipse]

I agree with ES_God
Kind of cheep to expect CAP is going to pay for your form 5 Flight time. Our aircraft time is cheap, about $50 dollars before fuel costs. Looking at the budget for 2009 CAP/USAF is going to pay less. Not to mention, no more ELT false hits (well far, far fewer)

I avoid the issue by using my own aircraft.  But I'm fortunate to still have my 172.  Worth every penny I pay though. 

You don't have to do the F5 in a CAP-typical airframe.  I have one member who will be doing his next one in a privately owned Yak.  YMMV wing-to-wing, of course.

[lordmonar]

I agree with ES_God
Kind of cheep to expect CAP is going to pay for your form 5 Flight time. Our aircraft time is cheap, about $50 dollars before fuel costs. Looking at the budget for 2009 CAP/USAF is going to pay less. Not to mention, no more ELT false hits (well far, far fewer)

I avoid the issue by using my own aircraft.  But I'm fortunate to still have my 172.  Worth every penny I pay though. 

You don't have to do the F5 in a CAP-typical airframe.  I have one member who will be doing his next one in a privately owned Yak.  YMMV wing-to-wing, of course.

I don't think that is right.

3-1. CAPF 5 Check Ride. A completed CAPF 5 denotes qualification to fly a particular model of CAP aircraft. It consists of ground and flight evaluations, and is valid for 12 calendar months from the date it is completed. CAPFs 5 may contain one or more endorsements for certain types of aircraft operation (instrument, cadet o-ride, instructor, check pilot or other). All pilots except CAP Solo pilots must complete a check ride. To be complete, the following must be accomplished as part of the CAPF 5 check ride:
a. Completion of an Aircraft Questionnaire for the model aircraft flown within 60 days prior to the flight check.
b. Pass the annual CAPF 5 online written examination (power or glider as applicable) within 60 days prior to the flight check.
c. Members must be current in accordance with FAA 14 CFR 61.57(a)(1) to carry passengers in the same category and class as the CAPF 5 aircraft prior to the flight check.
d. Evidence of qualifications (membership card, medical and pilot certificates, log book, questionnaire, and on line written exam results) must be presented to the check pilot at the time of the CAPF 5 flight check.
e. For airplanes only, the minimums are 1 hour flight time and 3 takeoffs and landings.

CAP does not have any YAKs......granted the ride does not have to be IN a CAP plane...but it must be the same type...ie. 182, 172, 206 or a G-8 (do we still have mauls?).

[jayleswo]

You don't have to do the F5 in a CAP-typical airframe.  I have one member who will be doing his next one in a privately owned Yak.  YMMV wing-to-wing, of course.

One problem: Experimental category aircraft, and this can often include ex-military aircraft not certificated in the US, cannot be used on any CAP Flight Activity. This is per CAPR 60-1 para 2-4a. Not sure what type of Yak this is, but your friend should be aware of this restriction.

[Eclipse]

CAP does not have any YAKs......granted the ride does not have to be IN a CAP plane...but it must be the same type...ie. 182, 172, 206 or a G-8 (do we still have mauls?).

Certainly outside my expertise, and the reg would seem to say NFW.  This would be a recurrent F5 for an experienced pilot.  My understanding was that it already cleared and they were just waiting for weather.  Wouldn't be the first time I was wrong.

[Eclipse]

You don't have to do the F5 in a CAP-typical airframe.  I have one member who will be doing his next one in a privately owned Yak.  YMMV wing-to-wing, of course.

One problem: Experimental category aircraft, and this can often include ex-military aircraft not certificated in the US, cannot be used on any CAP Flight Activity. This is per CAPR 60-1 para 2-4a. Not sure what type of Yak this is, but your friend should be aware of this restriction.

If he's not, one would assume the Checkpilot would be.

[jayleswo]

If he's not, one would assume the Checkpilot would be.

Seriously, not every checkpilot is aware of the regs as they should be.

[DG]

3-1. CAPF 5 Check Ride. A completed CAPF 5 denotes qualification to fly a particular model of CAP aircraft. It consists of ground and flight evaluations, and is valid for 12 calendar months from the date it is completed. CAPFs 5 may contain one or more endorsements for certain types of aircraft operation (instrument, cadet o-ride, instructor, check pilot or other). All pilots except CAP Solo pilots must complete a check ride. To be complete, the following must be accomplished as part of the CAPF 5 check ride:
a. Completion of an Aircraft Questionnaire for the model aircraft flown within 60 days prior to the flight check.
b. Pass the annual CAPF 5 online written examination (power or glider as applicable) within 60 days prior to the flight check.
c. Members must be current in accordance with FAA 14 CFR 61.57(a)(1) to carry passengers in the same category and class as the CAPF 5 aircraft prior to the flight check.
d. Evidence of qualifications (membership card, medical and pilot certificates, log book, questionnaire, and on line written exam results) must be presented to the check pilot at the time of the CAPF 5 flight check.
e. For airplanes only, the minimums are 1 hour flight time and 3 takeoffs and landings.

Lordmonar posted "CAP does not have any YAKs......granted the ride does not have to be IN a CAP plane...but it must be the same type...ie. 182, 172, 206 or a G-8 (do we still have mauls?)."
[/quote]




Lordmonar, you may want to reconsider your position.  CAP Aircraft can be member owned/furnished and does not have to be CAP Corporate.  But jayleswo is right, in the case of a YAK, it is a no go if the YAK is flying as an experimental.

And yes, the MT-7-235 Maule is alive and well in CAP.  It is doing great work in glider ops.  What are you using for your glider ops?

[PHall]

[And yes, the MT-7-235 Maule is alive and well in CAP.  It is doing great work in glider ops.  What are you using for your glider ops?

In CAWG we're using a C-182 since they sold our two Maules. One is in Mexico and the other is in France.

[RiverAux]

I've been known to slam the pilots in CAP every now and again, but overall the dedicated ones probably spend more money on maintaining their CAP and flying skills than the rest of us do on our CAP skills.  That being said, I think having them pay for their first one wouldn't be out of line.     

[SJFedor]

To add to the pile....

yes.

To get a funded (AF funds) checkride, you need to be a current SAR/DR, TMP, or Cadet Orientation Pilot. One cannot be a current anything without an initial form 5.

And like it's been said, if your member can't fork out the little bit of change to get qual'ed, especially considering the opportunity of "free" flying this member will be elligible for, then you probably need to be concerned about more then just whether or not you can get their initial funded.

As my high school football coach said, "you gotta give a little to get a little"

[DG]

To get a funded (AF funds) checkride, you need to be a current SAR/DR, TMP, or Cadet Orientation Pilot. One cannot be a current anything without an initial form 5.

And like it's been said, if your member can't fork out the little bit of change to get qual'ed, especially considering the opportunity of "free" flying this member will be elligible for, then you probably need to be concerned about more then just whether or not you can get their initial funded.

Well said.

[DG]

As my high school football coach said, "you gotta give a little to get a little"

High school football, Stevie?

"you gotta give a little to get a little"            

[Turk]

You, my fellow thread-mates have made a compelling argument that members should pay for their initial Form 5s.

Personally, I agree! And I certainly didn't mind paying for mine.

Buuuuuuut.... where in the regs is this actually required? 

[ßτε]

You, my fellow thread-mates have made a compelling argument that members should pay for their initial Form 5s.

Personally, I agree! And I certainly didn't mind paying for mine.

Buuuuuuut.... where in the regs is this actually required? 

It isn't required that the initial Form 5 is paid fore by the member. What is in the regs is that only SAR/DR, TMP, or Cadet Orientation Pilot can get AF reimbursement for Form 5 checkrides. If a pilot hasn't had an initial Form 5 yet, he or she cannot yet be a  SAR/DR, TMP, or Cadet Orientation Pilot yet, and is ineligible for AF reimbursement.

[Eclipse]

You, my fellow thread-mates have made a compelling argument that members should pay for their initial Form 5s.

Personally, I agree! And I certainly didn't mind paying for mine.

Buuuuuuut.... where in the regs is this actually required? 

It isn't required that the initial Form 5 is paid for by the member. What is in the regs is that only SAR/DR, TMP, or Cadet Orientation Pilot can get AF reimbursement for Form 5 checkrides. If a pilot hasn't had an initial Form 5 yet, he or she cannot yet be a  SAR/DR, TMP, or Cadet Orientation Pilot yet, and is ineligible for AF reimbursement.

Correct, there are some wings, especially in more "flush" years, that would occasionally pay for an initial under certain circumstances, though this was pretty rare.

As this is a budgetary item, even recurrent Form 5's need to be approved in advance by most states, especially towards the end of a fiscal year.

[sparks]

One more funding issue top add to the pile. The pilot must have a current BFR too. 60-1 doesn't use that precise language but that is what is intended. Getting the BFR also is funded by the pilot needing the training.

A question I occasionally receive concerns the legality of a pilot taking the BFR flight in a CAP aircraft in order to satisfy that CAPF 5 pre-requirement.   Since the pilot is assumed to have a Private or higher license the training ban on private license training wouldn't be an issue.

Thoughts?

[RADIOMAN015]

I think with the economy as it is, you are going to see less members really doing any personally funded proficiency flying -- perhaps the very minimum necessary.

Maybe there will be funds for reevaluating pilots as required by the regulation or maybe the priority will be to mission pilots only  (although I think cadet orientation pilots should also be considered in the priority mix). As far as transport pilots are concerned, IF someone has been in the program for over 12 months and is not progressing to any other speciality, than they are basically "flying club members" and we shouldn't allocate ANY funding for their re-qualification.

CAP is going to find it increasingly diffcult to retain aircraft in certain wings IF they base it solely on utilization hours.   
RM

[DG]

One more funding issue top add to the pile. The pilot must have a current BFR too. 60-1 doesn't use that precise language but that is what is intended. Getting the BFR also is funded by the pilot needing the training.

A question I occasionally receive concerns the legality of a pilot taking the BFR flight in a CAP aircraft in order to satisfy that CAPF 5 pre-requirement.   Since the pilot is assumed to have a Private or higher license the training ban on private license training wouldn't be an issue.

Thoughts?

For a pilot to present herself as a Form 5 candidate, she must be qualified and current.

CAP is in the business of checking out qualified and current pilots to fly CAP missions.

CAP is NOT in the business of training a Senior Member to become a qualified and current private pilot.

A check pilot must read CAPR 60-1 carefully and completely.

If there is no provision in 60-1 for specific training or endorsements , then it is not authorized and thereby is not covered by CAP insurance.

Does anyone see where 60-1 provides for a CAP check pilot to provide an FAA Flight Review, required every 2 years by the FAA?

I don't think so.

[flynd94]

Yes, but most of us CAP check airman are nice enough and, provide that BFR sign off.  The form 5 covers all the items on a BFR.  You will also find quite a few CAP Check Pilots/Instructors who will help you get up to speed to pass a form 5.  I have been doing this for the past 6 years and, no one has told me not.

PS- been a CAP pilot for 7 years and, have yet to get a 5/91 paid for

[Eclipse]

PS- been a CAP pilot for 7 years and, have yet to get a 5/91 paid for

Interesting. Does your state fund them for anyone?

Are you requesting funding and being denied, or just not asking. 

I'm not aware of any of my guys having to pay for their recurrency check rides as long as they are doing them withing the guidelines and deadlines. In some cases extensions are granted for pilots with legit circumstances that push them past their deadlines.

[heliodoc]

^^^^^^^^^

There are more of us out there than you think.........

I have not gotten nor asked for a"free ride" out of CAP!!

I have paid out of pocket and not lined up at the trough like the others prior to me

How's that for "free flyin" for all you others out there that state  some of us pilots are out there for the free flying

There are many of us who still pay whether or not its available and there MANY of us who have a BFR and a Form 5 done in the same year.  How's that for proficiency flying??

It also shows that some of us are still within the guidelines and deadlines.  Although I will be 2 weeks out of my Form 91 I STILL plan to pay out of pocket to show my support to CAP will I still am employed and may have a layoff  in the next 6 months

Think CAP will feel sorry for me, let's say a year from now, IF I am still unemployed?? Probably not.  I 'll give now when I can and then feel proud enough that the only time I got a free flight was either a mission or flying cadets. 

That will be my service to CAP.  I may ask for my free flight one day.....
.
What was your saying??  Local perception may not be a national reality.  I say kudos to the man who hasn't had CAP pay for his either.   There's some volunteerism in some us ,yet

When the day comes to cash in our chips, maybe CAP and other members MAY recognize that... Reality??  Probably not!!

[Eclipse]

There are many of us who still pay whether or not its available and there MANY of us who have a BFR and a Form 5 done in the same year. 

Why.

[heliodoc]

Why not

Little more logbook time AND  some of the accidents in some WINGS have had CFI's on board for one reason or another...

So again do you see a problem with some of us paying as we go??

Other than asking "why".......  How about realizing that some of us while not being able to attend EVERY CAP function is one way we can give back to the organization and ourselves by keeping the economy rolling as best we can

Any other question other than Why?

[Eclipse]

Why not

Little more logbook time AND  some of the accidents in some WINGS have had CFI's on board for one reason or another...

So again do you see a problem with some of us paying as we go??

Other than asking "why".......  How about realizing that some of us while not being able to attend EVERY CAP function is one way we can give back to the organization and ourselves by keeping the economy rolling as best we can

Any other question other than Why?

Fine, that's great, you don't want the money? Don't request it.  But don't thump your chest about your value as a volunteer, make veiled comments about others feeding at the "trough", or complain down the road if you have personal economic problems.

[heliodoc]

Did I offend you??

I see plenty of people thumping their chests here!!

Plenty of know it alls on this website

I just see plenty of folks in CAP who are at the trough for the free flyin time and those are the one who seem to get called for everything

So Eclipse, I volunteered for the RM and CAP as many have here

The ones that don't squarely agree with you here, seem to get your chapped commentary here

[flynd94]

PS- been a CAP pilot for 7 years and, have yet to get a 5/91 paid for

Interesting. Does your state fund them for anyone?

Are you requesting funding and being denied, or just not asking. 

I'm not aware of any of my guys having to pay for their recurrency check rides as long as they are doing them withing the guidelines and deadlines. In some cases extensions are granted for pilots with legit circumstances that push them past their deadlines.

CA, TX and, soon to be IL.  They do offer them, I have just never asked.  I have always had a good paying job and, felt that the money should be spent on other.  I guess I will be asking for a free ride in ILWG since I am a furloughed airline pilot   

[Flying Pig]

I am late on this one....however, the cost of a Form 5 is NOTHING compared to what a civilian sector bi-annual would cost.  I know that doesnt make it easier to pay sometimes.   I fly a C206 4-5 hours a day, and still have to pay for my Form 5's.   Once the person gets their initial, there are generally ways to get it funded after that on SAREX's.  

I have logged well over 100 hours of "free" or reimbursed flying in CAP alone, and have been sent to the Mountain Course and am in the CD program and got my High Performance Endorsement and have had the chance to listen to the "no S___ there I was....." stories from some outstanding pilots.  Putting down $75 per year for a form 5 isnt to bad.  I have made it a point to abuse the crap out of my CAP CFIs everytime I do one also!

The guys I fly with at work are amazed at the "free" training provided by CAP.  A few of them are still trying to figure out the border patrol missions and think Im part of a militia or something!

[Turk]

Okay, I can answer my own previous question, which was: "Where is it in the regs?"   

Answer - it ain't there. But it IS in CAP-USAF Instruction 10-2701. Poke 10-2701 into the CAP Knowledgebase search engine, and you'll come up with it. It'll be handy in case any of your more parsimonious and litigious) pilots whine, "but where does it say I gotta pay?" 

This will be inserted into the next version of 60-1, removing all doubt.   

[SJFedor]

Yup, there it is. 10-2701, 4.1.1:

4.1.1. SAR/DR training funds can only be used to pay for checkrides for pilots who are eli-gible to fly AFAMs. Reimbursement is not authorized for initial Form 5 checkride. How-ever, some wings may choose to use corporate funds to reimburse.

[es_g0d]

Quite ridiculous.  And quite like my Air Force to regulate EVERYTHING.  Fortunately, I'm a prolific user of Air Force Form-1, which handily comes in a many-sheet roll.  If you consult the proper Air Force Instruction, it will tell you where to hang such forms.  Typically, they're within reaching distance of a commode.  I'm glad this particular question was found in black-and-white, however.

Even if you hadn't found it in any publication, the response to your member needs to be this: BE THANKFUL when you have an opportunity to have something reimbursed.  DON'T expect it all to be free.  If the individual cannot bear the financial hardship, then this organization is not right for him/her in a (pilot) aviation capacity.  If someone is only relying on free flying to keep proficient and current, then they're not much of a contributor the the organization and are, instead, a liability.

[RocketPropelled]

It'll be handy in case any of your more parsimonious and litigious) pilots whine, "but where does it say I gotta pay?" 

And you could also turn the question on your parsimonious/litigious member:

"Where do the regs say you fly for free?"

[Turk]

It'll be handy in case any of your more parsimonious and litigious) pilots whine, "but where does it say I gotta pay?" 

And you could also turn the question on your parsimonious/litigious member:

"Where do the regs say you fly for free?"

And as my wing commander once remarked of a whiner, "If he doesn't like our way of doing things, he can always go to his local FBO!"     And pay double price, I would add...