Any former CAP members?

I was with CAP for over 20 years. Had a lot of fun with them initially, then working overseas interfered with my activities, but kept my membership active anyway. When I finally got a place to settle down for a bit, I realized that it would be over an hour's drive to get to meetings. Decided that with my job still taking my out of the country, I still wouldn't be able to participate, and didn't want to do the hour plus drive to meetings, so I let my membership lapse.
 
Stories like this don't help ether.

These are some of the things that apparently went wrong with the notifications & procedures. They are listed chronologically whenever possible. Note: The aircraft apparently crashed shortly after **********.


1) There was an unconfirmed report in **** on Sunday of smoke on the ridge between *******. Because there was no report of an aircraft emergency, it is unknown what procedures were implemented.
2) Although the FAA reportedly issued an ALNOT Report at ***** -- lots of counties and agencies were NOT notified for several days.
3) **** CAP (usually *******) regularly briefed the extended family on the search area & number of planes assigned. At the time, we did not know that they kept refusing other SAR resources (****** and other volunteers). It is still unclear who they did & did not notify. It is still unclear if they truly had the authority for all command decisions and had the right to refuse competent SAR resources. There seems to be conflicting guidance on this and even the counties didn't seem to know who was in charge.
4) Tuesday evening, I was flabbergasted that the ****** Sheriff's Office dispatcher told me that they were NOT aware of any missing plane even though they were located in ****** -- where the plane was last seen. ****** had briefed me that he was in touch with their acting Sheriff and he knew about it -- but the dispatcher claimed no knowledge of it and wasn't interested in the information.
5) In subsequent days, family & friends were contacting lots of county sheriff's offices to verify that they had been notified. We are still gathering times, dates, names, etc., but several counties including adjoining counties told us on Wednesday & even Thursday that they had received NO notifications on a missing plane in the area. Some counties said that they were quite upset because they had highly trained & equipped SAR resources that would gladly have begun searching days earlier.
6) Wednesday, we were assured that several counties including ******** had lots of ground SAR teams searching the local area. We were contacted on the Facebook page "*****" by private folks in that area who had volunteered their services with horses, ATVs & sleds, etc., but they told us that they were told by the county that they were NOT needed because they already had LOTS of search teams. Later, we received unconfirmed reports that SAR teams were not really deployed in that area after all. We really don't know!
7) When family members were contacting the governors & senators of **** requesting National Guard resources such as Black Hawks and ground search teams, they were repeatedly told that it was impractical because the search area was 2400 sq. miles. This was an invalid reason for rejecting those resources, because there was NO evidence that they ever got out of the valley from the ****** Airport. Shortly after takeoff, there was one single ping received near ****** -- with NO further contact. On Wednesday, a group of us including off duty pilots and an air traffic controller went over every scrap of evidence or absence there of. We went through EVERY conceivable scenario and our group agreed unanimously that there was NO evidence they ever got out of the valley area. On Wednesday night, I contacted CAP ***** and he verbally agreed with our findings. I insisted that because a severe winter storm was forecast, the governors & National Guard must be contacted immediately to mobilize all appropriate resources for Thursday morning. Black Hawk helicopters would be absolutely critical in searching the local ridges, canyons & ledges before they would be buried by snow! One ****** National Guard Black Hawk made one sortie late Thursday afternoon and reportedly were joined by 2 more on Friday. We are unaware of any National Guard ground search resources being deployed.
Because of our connections with the USAF, Wing Commanders or Command Posts at several bases in the region were contacted. Significant resources such as photo reconnaissance aircraft, rescue helicopters and even unmanned drones were reportedly available but had to be officially requested through channels. We had a friend who works with classified satellite imagery that said they could have helped, but we couldn't get anyone in authority to make the request. That imagery and/or unmanned drones could have focused around the ***** area, the mountains just north and east of there, and a few lakes in the area.
9) **** Search & Rescue was contacted by family members and they indicated they could provide technical expertise or deploy teams & equipment if officially requested through channels. That option was not chosen.


End Result: The missing plane was found by a ***** DPS helicopter at approx. 8:00 am, ****** -- 11.2 miles east of the ***** Airport. The pilot, 2 passengers and 2 dogs did not survive.


The **** State Medical Examiner in *** states that the pilot died almost immediately, but his 34 year old girlfriend probably lived 3-4 days. Both of her lower legs were broken, but she eventually died from exposure. He also stated that her 9 year old daughter probably lived for 4-5 days before lying down next to her mother and dying of exposure. Grrrrr! She was relatively uninjured and her tracks were all over the hillside apparently trying to get help. The NTSB Lead Investigator stated a cell phone was found showing that the young girl had been trying to send text messages to her Daddy for help. Grrrr!


I'm sure that there are plenty of officials that feel terrible about this tragedy. But I highly doubt that any one of them would have any idea how horribly the system failed us all in this case. Some of these counties spend a lot of time, effort, and money preparing for SAR missions. We cheapen their dedicated efforts if we don't find the resolve to overcome these critical problems. In honor of our young friends -- we MUST do better and save lives in the future!!!


We will appreciate your efforts to help with this matter. Thank you!
 
Well, the FRO checklist doesn't ask that question. It says "Is the pilot aware of the discrepancies, if there are any. If not, review them." So the way I read that I have to independently check for discrepancies, then determine whether the pilot is aware of what I found. Same problem with airworthiness -- it asks "Is it legal to fly with these discrepancies?" It does not ask "Does the pilot think it is legal to fly with these discrepancies."

Is it reading too much to read the items literally? If the bureaucrats just want me to quiz the pilot and take whatever answers I get (which would be fine with me) then that is what the checklist should ask.

Here's a language/logic trick I learned a long time ago: If you have to add the phrase "the way I read it," it means that you are not reading it literally. Sometimes it's because there are ambiguities, and sometimes it's because you're adding your own interpretation that isn't included in the wording. My feeling is that our regs and procedures are restrictive enough, so there's no need to add more restrictions.

It's the pilot's responsibility to review discrepancies, right? If they've called for a release and haven't reviewed them, I'd stop the conversation and tell them to call back when they have. Do that to a guy enough times and he'll learn to do it first.

There are few discrepancies that I can think of that wouldn't immediately suggest whether it's legal to fly. And if that is happening, it points to a communication issue in your group. If there's a squawk important enough to ground the airplane, the maintenance officer should know that immediately, and the aircraft status should show that the plane is grounded. If the plane is grounded, it has to be released by a senior FRO.

Why can’t WMIRS just track squawks and airworthiness? That was my problem with their computer systems. They didn’t know how to really USE computers to make the job easier, they just moved the 1990s paperwork into the computer and then keep adding to it.

And I know part of the reason. Bad squawks. More than once I was told something didn’t work in the airplane and I’d go check and the well documented switches added by STC with a manual right in the airplane explaining them. Were set wrong.
[...]
Hell, if you use the computers right they should spit out crew assignments for anything in a week and if someone can’t do it they need to flip their availability off in the software. Not that hard.

WMIRS does track squawks and airworthiness. It's not a great system, but it works.

Our former wing DO worked closely with NHQ after WMIRS first came on line. He was an engineer at Xerox, and commented that if Xerox were building a system of this size and complexity, it would have a sizable team working on it full time. What CAP had was just a couple of people who did it as part of their other duties, and they were volunteers. Unfortunately, you get what you pay for. WMIRS 2.0 is better. It's still ugly and clunky to use, but it gets the job done.
 
I recently joined my local squad on the recommendation from several flying club friends who are members. Being an active CFI and lawyer, they said I would be a great help to the unit and members. Sounded good to me, as I like to share my knowledge and learn from others. So I join and then see the hoops to fly through just to be an basic pilot. Forget the fact I can't even get my mission scanner thing scheduled...I am hearing 6 months just for that before I can get a pilot checkout. Mind you I will be leaving for airline ground school by the end of the year. Not to mention the attitude from the higher ups. I was getting lectured, rather condescendingly, about procedures, etc. I gently reminded this individual that this is a volunteer org., that I am donating my sparse free time and I am not in the military. So I think I will be cutting my losses and be done with CAP.
 
... Not to mention the attitude from the higher ups. I was getting lectured, rather condescendingly, about procedures, etc. ...
Yes. I am kind of casually a student of corporate culture and the culture at CAP is: "All my subordinates are children." This appears to come right from the top -- the Air Force.

All the way up and down the chain, people are treated like children. Watched, mistrusted, and in an attempt to control them, subjected to endless bureaucratic rules and procedures. Every year it gets worse. This year there was a major revamp to the flying rules and procedures, adding many silly things and taking away nothing. I will probably let my membership expire in August as I am so fed up.

Interestingly, I have started Disaster Services training with the American Red Cross. Yes, there have been some accusations of financial issues, but from the new volunteer point of view it is a breath of fresh air. They actually appreciate and cultivate their volunteers. There is a plethora of online and live webinar training that is created and managed at the national level, completely unlike the silos of CAP. National staff to the extent I have seen, does not seem to be preoccupied with CYA -- again unlike CAP. Their disaster management structure is based on the FEMA Incident Command System, so is very familiar. As part of my training I am going to Austin TX in May, expenses paid. In CAP, every dime is scrutinized and it is fairly routine for a legitimate expenditure to be rejected because of complex budget rules, screwing the person who incurred the expense. The acronym is often translated as Come And Pay. The only downside to the Red Cross is that they don't have airplanes!
 
I recently joined my local squad on the recommendation from several flying club friends who are members. Being an active CFI and lawyer, they said I would be a great help to the unit and members. Sounded good to me, as I like to share my knowledge and learn from others. So I join and then see the hoops to fly through just to be an basic pilot. Forget the fact I can't even get my mission scanner thing scheduled...I am hearing 6 months just for that before I can get a pilot checkout. Mind you I will be leaving for airline ground school by the end of the year. Not to mention the attitude from the higher ups. I was getting lectured, rather condescendingly, about procedures, etc. I gently reminded this individual that this is a volunteer org., that I am donating my sparse free time and I am not in the military. So I think I will be cutting my losses and be done with CAP.

I'm sad to say that your experience is not uncommon. There are better squadrons out there, though they may not be convenient for you.

A lot of this attitude comes down all the way from the top, including the USAF officers we interact with sometimes. It happens relatively regularly that a USAF officer at an EVAL mission will treat CAP volunteers poorly. Sometimes it's just poor management/leadership skills, sometimes they have an axe to grind (and poor leadership skills). There was one year that a USAF officer had discovered that the door pins that some of the shops had been using were not approved Cessna parts. He ramp checked an airplane himself, discovered the discrepancy, grounded the airplane and reprimanded the crew. Those poor volunteers were stuck 200 miles from home and had to wait until the exercise was over at the end of the day until we had a plane free to shuttle them home.
 
Yes. I am kind of casually a student of corporate culture and the culture at CAP is: "All my subordinates are children." This appears to come right from the top -- the Air Force.

All the way up and down the chain, people are treated like children. Watched, mistrusted, and in an attempt to control them, subjected to endless bureaucratic rules and procedures. Every year it gets worse. This year there was a major revamp to the flying rules and procedures, adding many silly things and taking away nothing. I will probably let my membership expire in August as I am so fed up.

Part of that is the USAF really does manage children. Thousands and thousands of them. Their culture does creep over into CAP.

And then there’s the mandatory “must accept all volunteers” garbage that sticks CAP with people who sometimes really shouldn’t be anywhere near airplanes. And then having to figure out how to run an Emergency Services organization with those folks thinking they’re a part of it. Or even capable of it.

I’ve said it for a long time... even the volunteer Fire Department has minimum joining standards and tests people on them, long before you get anywhere near a set of turn outs or a fire truck and begin real world training.

When you’re in and see bad piloting, hell even people pushing airplanes into poles and doing major damage... and other airport users hearing the CAP callsign while some dumbass does something stupid — even if they’re not even mission qualified and they’ve just managed to jump enough hoops to be essentially renting a Cessna like any other rental for proficiency flying and people are hoping they’ll leave before they try to jump through the Mission Pilot hoops...

Or... the old boy’s club members who manage to somehow stay on the Mission Pilot roster but aren’t challenged in their flying anymore and get sloppy and grow big heads...

That’s when you get the people who truly hate CAP on their field.

Problem is... the organization isn’t really allowed to say no. The Stan/Eval and CFI cadre can force someone out but it takes a long time and their bosses are often hyper aware of any possibility of political issues with certain members.

I’m not kidding when I say I was annoyed with one particular pilot who wasn’t that great at it, wasn’t involved in missions, and just used the airplanes for proficiency — who leveraged the hell out of being of a non-majority religion to constantly mess with the organization. “Can’t do training on X days of the week.” Crap like that. And I say that lightly because I know it’s a PC world, but seriously?

There’s people of that religious flavor in the VFD out here. And on the volunteer Sheriff’s Posse. They don’t tell the FD Chief or Sheriff that training has to be moved to accommodate them. Not at all. If they want to do the work, they show up.

The other common story is like the one above. “I joined and couldn’t get through all the hoops in six months”. Sometimes that’s a real cultural issue in some squadrons and SOMETIMES ... it’s because maybe, just maybe, cutting a low time Private Pilot loose pretending they’re ready to be a crew leader and responsible for three lives while doing an ES job, isn’t the right thing to do yet and they need some time practicing.

Done right a CAP cockpit can be a damn well oiled machine with a qualified and experience crew. Done wrong, it’s a disaster. There were MPs I felt comfortable flying with and MPs I refused to be paired with in the aircraft ever again. And some grey in between. One of the grey ones was a guy who was decent at flying, horrible at deciding what the crew should do if the plan has to change, and often missed OBVIOUS stuff like the G1000 flashing red because he was overboosting the aircraft at takeoff due to a known squawk on it that it would overboost.

It was right there in the damn book that it would do it. And we all briefed it as a possibility. And then I look up from the back seat on departure and it’s blinking away. For effs sake man, you can’t be that behind the airplane and be a crew leader. And he wasn’t leaning on his right seater for assistance with any of it.

So yeah. Need a standard PRIOR to joining or at least a standard PRIOR to doing ES work inside the org. Must be an adult. Must understand crew coordination. And must be able to really fly the freaking airplane.

And then the doofus who’s NOT ES qualified will still take the airplanes up and do stupid things and make airport enemies with the callsign.

Thought: Proficiency flights should use the N-number of the aircraft instead of the CAP callsign as an indication that the pilot ISN’T on a mission. That’d help. Maybe even remove the callsign on training missions too. Only use it when the aircraft is doing a real ES or O-Ride mission. Might help the PR problem the callsign creates.

Yeah, I’d rather the pilots just fly better and behave better but that’s not going to happen.

That’s probably a stupid idea but it’s just something off the top of my head. I always cringed when I heard some barely current pilot doing a personal proficiency flight driving everyone else on the frequency crazy with their bad or clueless behavior at a busy airport. I wanted my name NOT to be associated with that callsign.
 
Part of that is the USAF really does manage children. ...
Whew! :)

While I don't disagree on the incompetence aspect I don't think its the central problem. The "All my subordinates are children" paradigm, which is somewhat unique to CAP, is complicated by two other problems endemic (IMO) to volunteer organizations in general:

The first is quite simple: Any organization that does not produce a measurable output inevitable devolves to being political. If you don't believe this, cast your eyes at any level of government or at nonprofits you're familiar with.

The second is a little more subtle. Some appreciable fraction of volunteers are attracted to an organization because it gives them opportunities for power and prestige that they do not have in the rest of their lives. That is why we frequently see elaborate reward systems with pins, ribbons, complex and unnecessary job titles, etc. The needy volunteers are attracted to this and chase these carrots. I often tell people that CAP is basically Boy Scouts with airplanes. Think about the complex CAP rewards and the Boy Scout rewards and realize that they are fundamentally the same. I have seen analogous reward systems in other volunteer organizations as well.

As the needy volunteers amass rewards and job titles they feel a gain their power and prestige. Nothing wrong with that so far, but here is the catch: There is a reason these volunteers lack power and prestige in their regular lives, mostly because they are not competent to be managers and leaders. But in the volunteer organization they become managers and leaders, usually incompetent ones. (There was a national commander a few years ago who came from this ilk, He got booted when it was discovered that some of his bits of prestigious bling were obtained fraudulently by having others take his qualification tests.) I'm not painting all volunteers with this brush; my guess is that maybe 20-30% are in this category. But in their seeking power and prestige, they also contribute disproportionately to the organization. Working harder, longer, etc. and volunteering for work. So then the dilemma: You can't live with them but you can't live without them either.
 
My wife and one of her friends joined CAP but they both left pretty quickly. I think she felt like it was the good old boys club + no fun. I will ask her to fill out the survey.
 
All the way up and down the chain, people are treated like children. Watched, mistrusted, and in an attempt to control them, subjected to endless bureaucratic rules and procedures. Every year it gets worse.

Sounds like the entire federal government.
 
Sounds like the entire federal government.


Well, we have an ignorant electorate that constantly and childishly cries “Gimme! Gimme! Gimme!” and “Save me! Help me! Protect me!”

What other result would you expect?
 
When there's funding and you are getting a couple of flights a month paid for, it's worth the hassle, especially if you otherwise don't get to fly G1000 aircraft with GFC700s.

When there's no funding, it's pointless. At least for a senior squadron. I guess the cadet squadrons have other stuff to do besides fly?
 
...

The second is a little more subtle. Some appreciable fraction of volunteers are attracted to an organization because it gives them opportunities for power and prestige that they do not have in the rest of their lives. That is why we frequently see elaborate reward systems with pins, ribbons, complex and unnecessary job titles, etc. The needy volunteers are attracted to this and chase these carrots. I often tell people that CAP is basically Boy Scouts with airplanes. Think about the complex CAP rewards and the Boy Scout rewards and realize that they are fundamentally the same. I have seen analogous reward systems in other volunteer organizations as well....

The military is very similar as well.
 
When there's funding and you are getting a couple of flights a month paid for, it's worth the hassle, especially if you otherwise don't get to fly G1000 aircraft with GFC700s.

When there's no funding, it's pointless. At least for a senior squadron. I guess the cadet squadrons have other stuff to do besides fly?
Which wing gives you a couple of funded flights per month?
 
I'm former CAP. I was a cadet for 5 years 1963-1969. Rose through the ranks to be Cadet Commander of the Squadron.
In those days CAP was an Air Force Auxiliary organization. You wore a uniform to all functions, everyone turned out for drills and ceremonies, even the adults. We did practice rescue ops every other week, all year long. We represented the US of A at the International Drill Competition, and won, 2 years in a row. Glider Encampment, Powered Encampment, Jet Encampment, trips to DC, the Redstone Arsenal, exchange programs with Air Cadets in Canada, England, Turkey, Germany and a bunch of other countries. And competition rifle and pistol teams.
I did a lot REDCAP missions, I think it was around 276 in all. Got some medals, 2 Presidential Unit Citations, then went into the Air Force.
When I got out of the Air Force in 1973, I was a little gun shy about volunteering for things, and I was working full-time and back in college full-time.

Back in 2000 I turned up at a local Squadron for a meeting.
My impressions.
1. It was a good old boys flying club. No one wore a uniform, and they really didn't want to have to share their shiny new airplanes with another guy. They made that very clear.
2. They hadn't flown a REDCAP, or done ANY kind of Search and Rescue in a decade or more, and it was obvious they had no interest in doing any.
3. The Cadets would show up for meetings in uniform, and with one or two exceptions, the "Senior" members ignored them. The Cadets would volunteer for events and more often than not the Seniors would never show up.
4. As far as I could determine not one of the Senior members had ever served in the military, and were damn proud of it.
It was not the CAP I was involved with as a teenager.
This I have to agree with. I had much the same experience, and had zero interest in flying thier airplane. When I was a Cadet member in the late 70's early 80's, this was an active composite squadron, that specialized in SAR and communications. Getting a Ham Radio ticket was almost a requirement. We did numerous real-life search and rescue missions, from tornados to downed planes. (I still have the occasional nightmare from a couple of those.)
All were experiences that served me well later.

When I tried to reconnect a few years ago, it seemed to be more of a HS ROTC for the Air Force Recruiters.

In the end, I think it always comes down to the local senior leadership.
 
When there's funding and you are getting a couple of flights a month paid for, it's worth the hassle, especially if you otherwise don't get to fly G1000 aircraft with GFC700s.

When there's no funding, it's pointless. At least for a senior squadron. I guess the cadet squadrons have other stuff to do besides fly?

I don't pay to drive the firetruck.
 
The military is very similar as well.

I disagree 'Dog. There some of course, but no where what you're implying. At least in the Air Force, and I'm sure the other branches as well.
 
Which wing gives you a couple of funded flights per month?

MSWG.

Mission pilots got two 1.5 hour proficiency flights a month when things were normal. We also got Form 5s paid for. That was as recent as earlier last year. We are also the maintence base for the state so our squadron got kicked most of the ferry flights.

I've always figured that was possible because we are a smaller state with many less mouths to feed than somewhere like CA or NY. I know in many wings you don't get jack.
 
Why would any Milenial even think of joining CAP?

I debated it but the more I looked into it I realized I was not interested in being in a para military group of a bunch of wannabees making sure you cross every t and dot every i on never ending hoops. I wanted to use my skills, interest and passion of aviation to help others. From the best that I can tell that is not CAP anymore for a variety of reasons.

I fully undestand getting a checkout and training on procedures. Past that though all of that other crap just tells me you don't trust me and I am not going to waste my time with it. Instead I have focussed my effort on my local EAA chapter and I am the coordinator for a brand new program from EAA.
 
I am not a past, present or future CAP member but reading this thread has been enlightening, especially the justifications for 15-minute flight release waits . . . airdaile was especially entertaining, thiugh I think he meant to be serious. The FARs clearly state that the PIC is responsible for the airworthy status of the plane, not some chairwarming SOB miles away.

None of my CFIs ever mentioned that I could determine the airworthiness of a particular plane from the comfort of my recliner at home. No, I had to shovel the driveway, get my cold self out on the windy ramp and actually conduct a preflight inspection (some parts of which required removing my gloves).

Sure, there are basic things in the logs and maintenance records that may prevent me from flying a given airplane on a given day. But those should be known well in advance, and the plane removed from the schedule (which the flight school did from time to time, not waiting for me to show up, plan a flight and inspect the plane first!). If you need to pause and review things to determine if the plane is okay, then you are behind in your work! Had my flight school treated me like that, I'd have been looking for another one after my second flight. "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me!"

So it's a good thing I avoided CAP. The folks in charge would have had their fill of me calling their BS and asking them to do their freaking jobs well before I got tired of putting up with their crap, as I'd have stuck it out at least two or three months . . . .

Good luck, ya'll. CAP will either adapt or go away, and it doesn't sound like those in charge care much one way or the other, as long as they don't have to change.
 
Which wing gives you a couple of funded flights per month?
Colorado.

At noted in other posts, the states with highest need of SAR and related programs get money from various sources besides the Feds. In CO, CAP is part of the State Firewatch - activation started this past week, crews are set, but wind keeping everyone grounded. Last week (another thread) airplane went missing, CAP spent 4 days using the integrated the cell phone & air crew programs looking for anything, no success.

Most here know I'm a member of CAP, in a senior squadron that does the major chunk of flying, but I will never be a CAP pilot for the reasons posted here and other threads. Just not interested in the BS, besides, I own an airplane. Our senior members have been invited to watch live launches (local ULA offices, LockMart), be guinea pigs on a research study at the Academy, etc.

On the other hand, the cadet and aerospace education programs are some of the best around. Unfortunately AE tends to get either lumped into cadet programs and mostly ignored in the senior squadrons.
 
... . . . airdale was especially entertaining, though I think he meant to be serious. ...
Thank you. No offense taken. I frequently refer to it as a "clown show." From a distance that's obvious; in a close-up view, though, it is far more annoying than amusing.


... Good luck, ya'll. CAP will either adapt or go away, and it doesn't sound like those in charge care much one way or the other, as long as they don't have to change.
I think that's an accurate assessment. I'd add, too, that the three major management issues are probably not fixable even by a more competent national staff. "All my subordinates are children." comes right from the Air Force and is probably chiseled into a stone tablet somewhere. The other two problems are endemic to volunteer organizations and, when this well entrenched, are probably there to stay.
 
I’m not kidding when I say I was annoyed with one particular pilot who wasn’t that great at it, wasn’t involved in missions, and just used the airplanes for proficiency — who leveraged the hell out of being of a non-majority religion to constantly mess with the organization. “Can’t do training on X days of the week.” Crap like that. And I say that lightly because I know it’s a PC world, but seriously?
Flown with him once. Never again.
There’s people of that religious flavor in the VFD out here. And on the volunteer Sheriff’s Posse. They don’t tell the FD Chief or Sheriff that training has to be moved to accommodate them. Not at all. If they want to do the work, they show up.

Here's where we agree to disagree, and disagree because you're part of the 75% or so majority in the country that haven't been subject to what the other 5% have been thru their entire lives (20% of the US claims no religious affiliation).
When leadership is questioned why no training on Sunday and the response is "I go to church on Sunday", why aren't similar reasons just as valid, "I go to church on Saturday"? This is training, not actual missions. Just the smallest consideration, once in a while?
 
Here's where we agree to disagree, and disagree because you're part of the 75% or so majority in the country that haven't been subject to what the other 5% have been thru their entire lives (20% of the US claims no religious affiliation).
When leadership is questioned why no training on Sunday and the response is "I go to church on Sunday", why aren't similar reasons just as valid, "I go to church on Saturday"? This is training, not actual missions. Just the smallest consideration, once in a while?

I get it, I just never found any lack of training available on both weekend days since most activities were on both. When I worked weekends I couldn’t make any of them in my first stint in CAP, and I didn’t complain to anyone that we needed weekday stuff.

Interestingly when I worked weekends I did more mission activity than I ever did the second time around, because guess when missions happen? Not Saturday or Sunday.

Most VFDs have a mandatory “on call list” too. CAP always waffles around for two hours trying to find people on a Tuesday. Pitiful for a so called emergency services organization. Either the organization is ready to go, or they aren’t.
 
Not sure if it completely fits the bill of CAPs mission but here in Eastern IA we have had a missing autistic boy for a week now with a lot of searching going on. Never once have I heard of the CAP being utilized. Every other imaginable agency and group has been named as being involved but not the CAP.
 
Greeting all,

I'm a CAP member. Five years ago at a wing conference I attended a breakout session on recruiting and retention. After listening to much discussion I asked the question, "Why do people quit CAP?"

I got no answer except one (seriously): "Well, members die." I haven't received any better answers since. I am told that sometimes CAP does survey exiting members--but those surveys are only shared with a few command people.

So, I've worked with some researchers to construct a survey for former members. It is short--only nine questions--and takes about five to eight minutes to complete. But it will give me (and anyone interested) insight into why CAP loses members.

The survey was built with the help of academics who do this sort of thing all the time and have at their disposal powerful analytics tools. Thus, this is an academic effort that will become part of a research project studying non-profit organizational leadership and strategy. It is hosted by Auburn University. I've uploaded a copy of the survey if anyone is curious.

It is an anonymous survey; there is no login required and it in no way tracks or identifies respondents. So, please, to protect the integrity of the responses please only take the survey if you are indeed a former CAP member or if you have been inactive for at least six months.

Survey link: https://auburn.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_1MRXH7sLqO9SgUR

Many thanks!

MajTbird


P.S. Great aviation forum! I've lurked for a long while and just recently joined.

Done. Hope it helps.
 
Not sure if it completely fits the bill of CAPs mission but here in Eastern IA we have had a missing autistic boy for a week now with a lot of searching going on. Never once have I heard of the CAP being utilized. Every other imaginable agency and group has been named as being involved but not the CAP.

Most agencies don’t think about it. It takes a pretty significant effort to a) market the idea to agencies that a relatively inexpensive aerial resource is available (they already know they can ask for military helos), and b) they still have to pay for it if it’s not a nationally funded mission. They don’t pay MUCH, it’s way below the operating cost of the aircraft and the crew is essentially free, but many agencies won’t know or won’t bother calling and requesting mutual aid from a national organization.

Here in CO and in a few other places, CAP is “dual-hatted” and is both a national and State agency, and the State people do a better job of making it known to agencies that the resource exists under the dual command of the National Guard General who handles SAR activity for the State. The Governor’s office can fund and launch missions from the State budget.

The vast majority of Wings do not have that State relationship and worse, SAR in most western states is directed by the Sheriffs individually, so the Sheriff would have to know local contacts who would then notify National level contacts (Region staff or higher) to get mission funding or authorize a Sheriff’s department paid mission.

Here, a Sheriff can request a mission through the State EOC or Governor’s office and if the State deems mission worthy of State funding, they can pay for it instead of the Sheriff paying for it.

Other more oddball relationships exist in different States, depending on how historically SAR was handled there.

As an aside to this, in Wyoming it was well known for years that certain Sheriffs never used aircraft period in their county jurisdictions. You could see a crash investigation was started on the news and know flat out no air resources would ever ever ever be called in. Their system is the Sheriff is 100% responsible for SAR unless that’s changed over the years.

So, it all depends on the State and their laws and who’s paying. CAP National has set rates for utilizing aircraft and crews for non USAF funded missions and they’re quite reasonable, but the Tower of Babel in local government and State government often have no idea that it’s an available resource. Or worse, have their buddies with a contract to fly their helicopter on speed dial. A lot of that crap in local funding, too.

In CO, a couple of bright Sheriffs have set aside budget for air work specifically and have used CAP for some interesting missions like fire watch. Those missions came out of discussions at STATE planning meetings where Sheriff’s dept representatives do table-tops and planning with the State EOC and that’s where the brighter Sheriff’s (with money to spend too, many counties are way too broke to bother) figured out they had a possible resource and ran a few tests a number of years ago to see how the CAP crews could work with their dispatch offices to react to brand new brush fires more quickly in the worst part of the summer fire season.

As a big huge general statement, CAP does a horrid job in most areas at participating in local interagency meetings.

Here because the State funds one job role that is a State liaison between CAP and the State, that same person is often involved in State level planning that also local agencies participate in, and they naturally learn there’s another resource at the table-top sessions and planning meetings. Many of those planning sessions also include and involve full time FEMA folks as well, so “visibility” of the resource available (CAP) is higher.

Asking a volunteer to do that in States that don’t pay for a liaison, isn’t going to work. It’s a full time job.

But then again, most volunteer FDs and other SAR groups manage to attend a LOT more of those meetings than CAP people do. Even here.
 
^^ regarding the above... CAP ends up insulated from the local agencies that might need them because of the relationship with USAF and the marketing being all wrong.

“Missions for America” and “Total Force” make CAP sound like USAF adjunct instead of maybe say something like, “Aviation Resources for Communties” and jokingly “Ignore our stupid USAF paint jobs and fake rank uniforms. We’re not really part of the USAF even though they want us to wank off to the TotalForce marketing BS. All they are is our auditor.”
 
Not sure if it completely fits the bill of CAPs mission but here in Eastern IA we have had a missing autistic boy for a week now with a lot of searching going on. Never once have I heard of the CAP being utilized. Every other imaginable agency and group has been named as being involved but not the CAP.

CAP can be involved in those kinds of searches, but the authority with jurisdiction for the search has to know that they exist and call them.
 
The more I read about CAP, the requirements, etc....wow the AF must be completely different than the Navy! In the Navy I scrubbed dishes for about a month (sucked) but each night I worked on qualifications. So just 30 days later I was driving a Nuclear submarine. I wasn't talking about it or hoping for it. While I did that I qualified in a rating and moved up again. Things took weeks, sometimes a few months. I think I'd go insane if CAP/AF had this long drawn out good old boys paperwork fest. Now I can see why no one young would join - the path to doing "fun ****" just seems too drawn out. Now maybe if CAP service lowered the 1500hr minimums I could see if being a different story.

Why not do this: Allow clubs or groups to receiving training in aviation based SAR from a local agency (Sheriff, etc). Once signed off they can purchase a CAP plane (yes, no longer theirs) that can be used for club flying and SAR. The club would have to document a minimum amount of training. They would also have to agree (which they easily would) to pre-empt regular club flight reservations to support a SAR or whatever the sheriff or fire department needs. Basically the equivalent of a volunteer fire fighter but the volunteers own the plane and can use it when there aren't fires. Or what scuba divers do to assist PD's and Counties. Wouldn't something like this be way more efficient than CAP and all the politics. Heck, maybe even introduce a new 14 CFR xxx based rating for SAR-Land, etc. I would take that up in an instant. This would get all those nice 172's/182's flying. And only some of the CAP money would be needed to re-imburse these groups when they fly an actual mission or do their minimal training.
 
The more I read about CAP, the requirements, etc....wow the AF must be completely different than the Navy! In the Navy I scrubbed dishes for about a month (sucked) but each night I worked on qualifications. So just 30 days later I was driving a Nuclear submarine. I wasn't talking about it or hoping for it. While I did that I qualified in a rating and moved up again. Things took weeks, sometimes a few months. I think I'd go insane if CAP/AF had this long drawn out good old boys paperwork fest. Now I can see why no one young would join - the path to doing "fun ****" just seems too drawn out. Now maybe if CAP service lowered the 1500hr minimums I could see if being a different story.

You were a captive on the boat. Do all of that in one 8 hour weekend training course and a couple of weekday hours, including the dishwashing. LOL. (By dishwashing I mean you spent 70% of your time doing menial stuff and all organizations have menial stuff that has to get done.)

Comparing a full time job where you literally live where you work (including Navy and USAF) to a volunteer gig is crazy. Volunteer gigs usually have to figure out the best use of everyone’s time and don’t have any left over for stupid bureaucracy.

But a volunteer organization being audited by a bored team of USAF Captains hanging around a few more years for retirement points, is a part time job for the volunteers dumb enough to take a squadron leadership role along with wanting to do anything in actual missions.

You also had senior people helping you pass and they were the majority of the boat, the newbies weren’t.

In CAP you have a majority of newbies and no flow control on that whatsoever (they have to “hire” whoever walks in the door) with a few senior folk who are constantly bombarded with “How do I get to where I can fly?” from the pile of newbies and the senior folks get a manual and maybe if they’re lucky a video to train everyone who walks through the door how to work IN EMERGENCY SERVICES. And half of those newbies leave in a couple of years and after a while the seniors (who themselves didn’t show up to teach but to DO things 20 years ago) have almost no interest in teaching it again WITH NEW RULES every couple of months.

The only people I see who do well in that FLYING ES ORGANIZATION who teach are people who teach because that’s what they INTENDED to do. Like CFIs! Duh.

Often CAP leadership isn’t determined by skill, it’s determined by who can take the most time away from their day job. The really heinous time killer jobs like Crew Chief, are almost always either someone working at the airport already as a mechanic, or a retired guy. You can’t freaking manage maintenance on busy aircraft from your desk job clear across town.

And let’s talk about that for a minute shall we? CAP started out with NO FLEET. The only damn reason it has a fleet is that the Senator from Kansas wants to give Cessna money. For some highly specialized missions yes, corporate aircraft needed, but politics and lawyers have killed personal aircraft use.

And no, don’t give me that crap that the missions need standardized G1000 Cessnas with a freaking Becker and an FM radio. You know what we did back when CAP didn’t have CORPORATE radios? We drilled a hole in an inspection port, ran the coax into the cockpit and stuck an earbud inside our headset with a handheld. And no, they STILL don’t use their highly expensive digital radios properly anyway, so analog is just fine. Code words for sensitive topics.

Half of the damn aircrews couldn’t figure out the freaking STCd and well documented audio panel changes for those additional radios anyway. Probably too busy doing monthly mandatory safety meetings to act like they’re full time USAF employees and that meeting was just one of many.

Corporate aircraft was a mistake. Painting them in USAF colors and marketing them that way is also a mistake. This is the CIVIL Air Patrol. Want USAF crews? Send out a helo.


Why not do this: Allow clubs or groups to receiving training in aviation based SAR from a local agency (Sheriff, etc). Once signed off they can purchase a CAP plane (yes, no longer theirs) that can be used for club flying and SAR.

Any Sheriff can do that today and many do. Why pay for a CAP plane? Just buy a good one non-new at half or less the price and maintain it well?

The club would have to document a minimum amount of training. They would also have to agree (which they easily would) to pre-empt regular club flight reservations to support a SAR or whatever the sheriff or fire department needs.

Already done in CAP. Along with a million other requirements. See: Using volunteers as trainers for hoardes of newbies, above.

Basically the equivalent of a volunteer fire fighter but the volunteers own the plane and can use it when there aren't fires. Or what scuba divers do to assist PD's and Counties. Wouldn't something like this be way more efficient than CAP and all the politics. Heck, maybe even introduce a new 14 CFR xxx based rating for SAR-Land, etc. I would take that up in an instant. This would get all those nice 172's/182's flying. And only some of the CAP money would be needed to re-imburse these groups when they fly an actual mission or do their minimal training.

You’re describing what used to be done with personally owned aircraft under official CAP missions up until the Cessna restart and politicians in Congress deciding that CAP needed a nice shiny fleet of brand new Cessnas. Any Doc or Lawyer with spare time and an airplane could help out as long as they put the training time in.

Money back then was spent for SARCOMPs (SAR competitions) to see who’s the best crews. Awards were given out. Etc. No money for that today. Zero. SAREX (SAR Exercises / Training ) yes there’s very limited funds. And they’re RARELY done in cooperation with any other local agencies which is really what needs to happen.

But let’s also not forget we live the era of government handouts and “fairness” and those who don’t own an aircraft would whine mightily that the government needed to provide some for them to participate in. In a VFD the specialized gear like fire trucks is provided (barely, and usually purchased used and cheap from big city departments when the city folk get new ones on the taxpayer dime) but members may still outfit POVs with lights, radios, and whatever they feel like they need to show up at a dispatch. If the tool fits the job, feel free to bring it. Up to you and we aren’t replacing it if you wreck it.

Also realize local agencies train on Saturday and Sunday sometimes... but sometimes on Tuesday. Sometimes a big State exercise is a week long.

Want to look like a flaky ES organization? Say you’ll only participate in training on weekends, you have no dedicated trainers and all your job personnel are tired from reaching four classes this month for people who already left the organization because you have no standards or hiring process, and your rank is based off of who can spend $1000 to travel to an out of state FEMA class, not time in service or any objective measurement of job function. Think any Fire Chiefs get the title before they know a lot about fighting freaking fires?
 
... So, I've worked with some researchers to construct a survey for former members. It is short--only nine questions--and takes about five to eight minutes to complete. But it will give me (and anyone interested) insight into why CAP loses members. ...
OK. It's been a month. Do you have any insights or preliminary results you could share? I'm sure many are curious.
 
The more I read about CAP, the requirements, etc....wow the AF must be completely different than the Navy! In the Navy .
.
.
ng. And only some of the CAP money would be needed to re-imburse these groups when they fly an actual mission or do their minimal training.

Or why have a federal organization to perform a local function at all ?
In some states, CAP isn't even involved in searches for missing aircraft. State police, ANG etc. provide air assets if needed.
USAF could allocate their SAR money via grants to competent state level organizations.

/heresy
 
Or why have a federal organization to perform a local function at all ?
In some states, CAP isn't even involved in searches for missing aircraft. State police, ANG etc. provide air assets if needed.
USAF could allocate their SAR money via grants to competent state level organizations.

/heresy

I’m actually with you on that idea. Or minimize the national level move decisions down lower. But with Congress paying the bill from Fed funds and buying an airplane fleet, to appease the politicians in Kansas, that’s not the direction it is headed.

A lot of the early national fleet was USED aircraft from military flight clubs. Club would upgrade and offer CAP locally a decent deal on whatever they were getting rid of. Same with some actual military surplus. The L-19 Bird Dogs were from USAF, the T-41s mostly came out of military training commands and base flight clubs. And you filled in with privately owned Cessnas, mostly for the downward visibility, with the occasional Mooney, or Piper.

Subsidizing Cessna wasn’t part of the game back then. Neither was national “standardization” to the extent it is today. Or a national mission tracking and ratings system on a web site.

The winds are blowing the wrong way. But you’re right. Many States just throw up their hands and buy their own aircraft, hire their own crews, and manage their own local affairs the way they want them managed, just so they don’t have to deal with a national organization and all the bureaucracy that can go with that.
 
Back
Top