Pros/Cons of Joining the Civil Air Patrol?

[denverpilot]

Depends on what it is. In many cases, the state and feds don't have resources to "do it" and rely on other agencies and volunteers. In many cases they use CAP because it's less expensive than using a state/federal resource.

CAP *is* a federal resource. And in some states, it’s also a State resource. Directed by State and Federal resources as to what missions to fly.

I think you meant to say, “A more expensive State or Federal resource, or approved government contractor.”

 

[Sundancer]

My experience was the flight release process varied from minimally invasive to silly, depending on who you were, and the FRO. Getting a funded training mission could sometimes take, literally, a half dozen emails, the same number of phone calls, and a before and after session with a truly wretched web app.

I hear it's worse now. . .true story; I called for a release from home and the FRO asked me:
"Has the tow bar been removed?"
"I dunno, I'm at home."
"Why didn't you call me from the airport?"
"It's 25 miles away - what if I get there and you can't/won't release me because the system says I'm out of date on some obscure qual/test/quiz etc.?"
"Then just call me when you get there and tell me the tow bar has been removed."
"Otherwise I'm good to go?"
"Uhh, I'll check when you call me back".
"Don't wait by the phone. . ."

Seems someone, somewhere, took off with a tow bar attached. So they added the question to every release speil. I swear it's true - asking if the tow bar had been removed. . .

 

[denverpilot]

My experience was the flight release process varied from minimally invasive to silly, depending on who you were, and the FRO. Getting a funded training mission could sometimes take, literally, a half dozen emails, the same number of phone calls, and a before and after session with a truly wretched web app.

I hear it's worse now. . .true story; I called for a release from home and the FRO asked me:
"Has the tow bar been removed?"
"I dunno, I'm at home."
"Why didn't you call me from the airport?"
"It's 25 miles away - what if I get there and you can't/won't release me because the system says I'm out of date on some obscure qual/test/quiz etc.?"
"Then just call me when you get there and tell me the tow bar has been removed."
"Otherwise I'm good to go?"
"Uhh, I'll check when you call me back".
"Don't wait by the phone. . ."

Seems someone, somewhere, took off with a tow bar attached. So they added the question to every release speil. I swear it's true - asking if the tow bar had been removed. . .

This all goes back to their built in problem that they have to accept all comers.

You should have to apply for the job and win it via objective measures once they started buying the airplanes.

Wasn’t that long ago the airplanes were member owned and it wasn’t a mega-Corp with a 501c(3) number. Just volunteers looking to help.

They turned themselves into a very badly run agency of government to placate a Kansas Senator and give big money to Cessna as welfare.

Even other volunteer SAR groups have membership standards and they’re not about how well you wear their uniforms, that they don’t have.

They also don’t usually have rank. They have job titles. And they qualified for them.

 

[ChrisK]

Does anybody know if CAP provides indemnification to the FRO for the level of liability implicit in all that?

This came out in a memo recently:

"CAPR 900-5, paragraph 11d is clear that all CAP flight release officials (FROs and
SFROs) are covered under CAP’s aviation liability insurance provided they are involved in a corporate mission and they are acting within the scope of CAP regulations and their authority. Similarly, when supporting Air Force missions, these same officials are covered under the Federal Torts Claims Act."

 

[Palmpilot]

...Here is the two-page FRO checklist that must be completed before releasing a flight: https://www.gocivilairpatrol.com/static/media/cms/FRO_Checklist_16DD945CB82CD.pdf...

One thing I notice about that is the flight release checklist asks about recency in type, whereas the current version of the risk assessment worksheet (formerly known as ORM) that the pilots are instructed to use only asks about recency in category and class. If I had known what was on the FRO checklist, it could have saved me some embarrassment a couple of weeks ago. I'm Form 5 current in the 206 even though I haven't flown one recently, and the FRO I called wasn't comfortable with that. I felt that I could do it safely based on past experience in flying a variety of types, but I can't fault the FRO for taking a more conservative approach. I just wish I had known ahead of time about the disconnect between the form he was working from and the one that pilots use.

 

[Palmpilot]

My experience was the flight release process varied from minimally invasive to silly, depending on who you were, and the FRO....

I've noticed the same thing recently. I think part of it is that the questions on the FRO checklist call for a lot of subjective judgment, which can be hard if the FRO doesn't know the pilot very well.

 

[bflynn]

I'm Form 5 current in the 206 even though I haven't flown one recently, and the FRO I called wasn't comfortable with that.

Example of the change of the FRO becoming responsible for the safety of the flight. The standard is that you've had a checkride in the past year and not having flown recently is a risk, not a veto factor. Your FRO elevated recency in the model to the level of an expired Form 5. FROs should really not be setting standards of pilot ability, STANEVAL does that.

 

[murphey]

My experience was the flight release process varied from minimally invasive to silly, depending on who you were, and the FRO. Getting a funded training mission could sometimes take, literally, a half dozen emails, the same number of phone calls, and a before and after session with a truly wretched web app.

I hear it's worse now. . .true story; I called for a release from home and the FRO asked me:
"Has the tow bar been removed?"
"I dunno, I'm at home."
"Why didn't you call me from the airport?"
"It's 25 miles away - what if I get there and you can't/won't release me because the system says I'm out of date on some obscure qual/test/quiz etc.?"
"Then just call me when you get there and tell me the tow bar has been removed."
"Otherwise I'm good to go?"
"Uhh, I'll check when you call me back".
"Don't wait by the phone. . ."

Seems someone, somewhere, took off with a tow bar attached. So they added the question to every release speil. I swear it's true - asking if the tow bar had been removed. . .

Tow bar not removed, at least twice in the Colorado wing, in recent memory. And then there was the episode where the manual trim was correct but the electric trim comtrol was wired in reverse during maintenance, and the pilot took off anyway, thinking the electric trim was just stiff. Couldn't understand why he had so much trouble taking off. Made no attempt to verify on the ground with the manual trim. Episode turned into a "safety example" at the next meeting. Neither pilot nor co-pilot (also a pilot) thought they did anything wrong, even made light of it.

This is why I'm aerospace education and cybersecurity. There are 3 very senior pilots in the squadron I refuse to even get into the airplane with.

 

[Palmpilot]

Example of the change of the FRO becoming responsible for the safety of the flight. The standard is that you've had a checkride in the past year and not having flown recently is a risk, not a veto factor. Your FRO elevated recency in the model to the level of an expired Form 5. FROs should really not be setting standards of pilot ability, STANEVAL does that.

It's somewhat complicated by the fact that an annual Form 5 renewal in a 182 also renews Form 5 currency in a 206.

 

[airdale]

Example of the change of the FRO becoming responsible for the safety of the flight. ...

CAP will tell you that the FRO is not a dispatcher and is not responsible for the safety of the flight, but ...

I think the current paroxysm of stupidity stems from a recent NTSB report on a fatal CAP crash and the NTSB recommendations, which clearly indicated that they did not understand the role of the flight releaser, faulting him and CAP for his not functioning like a dispatcher -- a job they are familiar with. It is quite common for the FAA to ignore NTSB recommendations, sometimes because they don't make sense and sometimes for reasons that are not obvious. In this case the recommendation did not make sense.

CAP should have ignored the NTSB recommendations because the largely didn't apply to the flight release process. Instead, in a typical fit of CYA regardless, they rewrote and substantially increased the stupidity of both the risk management questionnaire and the FRO checklist, by that, substantially reduced our ability to be effective on missions where time is of the essence.

So of course it looks like dispatcher stuff, because it is dispatcher stuff. Compounding the problem is the tendency of many (20-30% IMO) to relish the power trip of jacking people around. @Sundancer's parable of the tow bar illustrates.

 

[bflynn]

It's somewhat complicated by the fact that an annual Form 5 renewal in a 182 also renews Form 5 currency in a 206.

Do you have that backwards? NC Wing considers the 206 to be the "higher" airplane, so the 206 renews the 182. But I don't think the 182 renews the 206.

Regardless, if StanEval stays that you're good to go, then the FRO should not be re-evaluating you at every flight. Otherwise, why have standards at all if every FRO is going use their own standards.

 

[Sundancer]

Tow bar not removed, at least twice in the Colorado wing, in recent memory. And then there was the episode where the manual trim was correct but the electric trim comtrol was wired in reverse during maintenance, and the pilot took off anyway, thinking the electric trim was just stiff. Couldn't understand why he had so much trouble taking off. Made no attempt to verify on the ground with the manual trim. Episode turned into a "safety example" at the next meeting. Neither pilot nor co-pilot (also a pilot) thought they did anything wrong, even made light of it.

This is why I'm aerospace education and cybersecurity. There are 3 very senior pilots in the squadron I refuse to even get into the airplane with.

I found it an assinine question - to take it to an equivalent, yet absurd extreme, add "Are the fuel caps on?", "Are the cowl plugs removed", etc. The silly aspect is the knee jerk reaction to add it to a query that will often not match the reality - I wasn't at the airport, for example, and that's a common situation. Or it's off now, but won't be after I use it to pull the airplane out of the hangar, which I ain't gonna do before I get a release. I can see having it mentioned in safety meetings, or as part of other outreach to pilots. It was just an ill conceived and nonsensical CYA effort of no value.

 

[ChrisK]

Do you have that backwards? NC Wing considers the 206 to be the "higher" airplane, so the 206 renews the 182. But I don't think the 182 renews the 206.

That was changed nationally with the most recent CAPR 70-1:

“7.1.7. Unless otherwise noted by the CAP Check Pilot, all previous aircraft for which the pilot has an initial CAP Pilot Flight Evaluation are renewed at the time of the annual CAP Pilot Flight Evaluation. Check Pilots will confirm that pilots meet all requirements as outlined in other parts of this regulation prior to signing off completion of the CAPF 5 or CAPF 5B.”

 

[airdale]

I found it an assinine question - to take it to an equivalent, yet absurd extreme, add "Are the fuel caps on?", "Are the cowl plugs removed", etc. ...

All very understandable. All you have to remember is that the CAP management philosophy is "All my subordinates are children." This appears to begin with the Air Force. Since all pilots are children, it is totally appropriate to assume they are stupid, impulsive, and have poor judgment. This problem must then be remedied with byzantine procedures and with suffocating supervision, often by people who are unqualified for the role. The head panjandrum, national director of ops, has only a private certificate and is not listed in the FAA database as being instrument rated.

We have one "senior" flight release officer, supposedly possessed with superior judgment due to having 1K hours and an instrument rating. In actual fact all of his experience is in the sheltered workshop that is CAP flying. I am 99% certain that he has never even once taken off solo into a low overcast. Since CAP pilots never really go anywhere (it's against policy) his weather planning has almost universally consisted of looking out the window and reading the TAF covering the next couple of hours. He is the type who will ask tow bar status.

 

[Palmpilot]

Do you have that backwards? NC Wing considers the 206 to be the "higher" airplane, so the 206 renews the 182. But I don't think the 182 renews the 206.

I took my annual Form 5 in a 182, and Op Quals on the National Headquarters web site shows that, and it also says that I'm qualified in the 206, and that I haven't taken an annual Form 5 in a 206. You should be able to look me up by name in Ops Quals.

Regardless, if StanEval stays that you're good to go, then the FRO should not be re-evaluating you at every flight. Otherwise, why have standards at all if every FRO is going use their own standards.

You're preaching to the choir here, but in the end, I prefer not to "fight City Hall," so I am scheduled to get some 206 time with an instructor pilot next week. I really don't mind; it was just kind of embarrassing to have to scramble to find someone else to ferry the plane back from our maintenance base.

 

[weilke]

We have one "senior" flight release officer, supposedly possessed with superior judgment due to having 1K hours and an instrument rating. In actual fact all of his experience is in the sheltered workshop that is CAP flying. I am 99% certain that he has never even once taken off solo into a low overcast. Since CAP pilots never really go anywhere (it's against policy) his weather planning has almost universally consisted of looking out the window and reading the TAF covering the next couple of hours. He is the type who will ask tow bar status.

There seem to be regional/local differences. This morning I met with the CFI at 8 for my annual IPC. 600ft ceiling and heavy rain. We were waiting in tbe FBO lobby for the worst to movr through. When it let up an hour later, the first little aircraft that took off into the overcast was the local CAP 182.

 

[denverpilot]

There seem to be regional/local differences. This morning I met with the CFI at 8 for my annual IPC. 600ft ceiling and heavy rain. We were waiting in tbe FBO lobby for the worst to movr through. When it let up an hour later, the first little aircraft that took off into the overcast was the local CAP 182.

You assume the risk assessment has weather and things that’ll actually kill you on it or weights them heavier than stuff like the tow bar.

 

[ChrisK]

You assume the risk assessment has weather and things that’ll actually kill you on it or weights them heavier than stuff like the tow bar.

There seem to be regional/local differences. This morning I met with the CFI at 8 for my annual IPC. 600ft ceiling and heavy rain. We were waiting in tbe FBO lobby for the worst to movr through. When it let up an hour later, the first little aircraft that took off into the overcast was the local CAP 182.

9.10.5.3.1. Within 2 hours of departure, crews must determine the lowest forecast weather conditions (including temporary conditions) for both time of departure and time of arrival for purposes of flight release (see paragraph 9.10.2.6.).

9.10.5.3.2. Any FRO may approve an IFR sortie when forecast conditions (including temporary conditions) for departure and arrival airports meet or exceed an 800 foot ceiling and 2 miles of visibility or approach minimums, whichever is higher, assuming no other factors in ORM process require higher approval.

9.10.5.3.3. An SFRO must approve an IFR sortie when forecast conditions (including temporary conditions) for departure or arrival airports are lower than an 800 foot ceiling and 2 miles of visibility, but not below a 500 foot ceiling and 1 mile of visibility.

 

[weilke]

9.10.5.3.1. Within 2 hours of departure, crews must determine the lowest forecast weather conditions (including temporary conditions) for both time of departure and time of arrival for purposes of flight release (see paragraph 9.10.2.6.).

9.10.5.3.2. Any FRO may approve an IFR sortie when forecast conditions (including temporary conditions) for departure and arrival airports meet or exceed an 800 foot ceiling and 2 miles of visibility or approach minimums, whichever is higher, assuming no other factors in ORM process require higher approval.

9.10.5.3.3. An SFRO must approve an IFR sortie when forecast conditions (including temporary conditions) for departure or arrival airports are lower than an 800 foot ceiling and 2 miles of visibility, but not below a 500 foot ceiling and 1 mile of visibility.

I am sure everyone had the meritbadges on their sash lined up in the correct order to make this CAP legal.

 

[denverpilot]

9.10.5.3.1. Within 2 hours of departure, crews must determine the lowest forecast weather conditions (including temporary conditions) for both time of departure and time of arrival for purposes of flight release (see paragraph 9.10.2.6.).

9.10.5.3.2. Any FRO may approve an IFR sortie when forecast conditions (including temporary conditions) for departure and arrival airports meet or exceed an 800 foot ceiling and 2 miles of visibility or approach minimums, whichever is higher, assuming no other factors in ORM process require higher approval.

9.10.5.3.3. An SFRO must approve an IFR sortie when forecast conditions (including temporary conditions) for departure or arrival airports are lower than an 800 foot ceiling and 2 miles of visibility, but not below a 500 foot ceiling and 1 mile of visibility.

Their “special” standard is 300’ ABOVE the FAA standard to earn the certificate? Ouch.

 

[labbadabba]

I flew just this week into 700ft OVC in a CAP 182. Our eventual mission was to simulate A-10s in coordination with the USAF and Army Forward Air Controllers. We flew multiple close air support sorties simulating bombing and strafing runs within an active range.

It was some of the coolest flying I've had a chance to do. To use actual A10s would have been $10k per hour, a defense contractor $2k per hour. Our C182 set them back $140 an hour. I'll be flying this mission again this Fall. Can't wait!

 

[Palmpilot]

Their “special” standard is 300’ ABOVE the FAA standard to earn the certificate? Ouch.

There was some speculation in other threads that this might have been precipitated by an accident in Alabama in which a CAP pilot lost it on a missed approach, and the NTSB faulted the FRO, for some reason.

I don't mind the increased minimums as they apply to takeoff decisions, but the part I question the wisdom of is the following micromanagement of decision making when weather at the destination turns out to be worse than forecast. The way it's written, it seems to make it more likely that CAP pilots will be flying missed approaches, which seems like an odd response to a pilot's inability to fly a missed approach safely.

"9.10.5.3.5. When established on any segment of the approach, should weather decrease below the minimums authorized by the flight release, the pilot in command is expected to abort the landing and continue on to the planned alternate airport or establish a holding pattern and wait until conditions again meet the above requirements. If conditions at available alternates and the primary airport do not improve or otherwise meet these requirements, pilots may exercise discretion and approach to published minimums."​

 

[denverpilot]

There was some speculation in other threads that this might have been precipitated by an accident in Alabama in which a CAP pilot lost it on a missed approach, and the NTSB faulted the FRO, for some reason.

I don't mind the increased minimums as they apply to takeoff decisions, but the part I question the wisdom of is the following micromanagement of decision making when weather at the destination turns out to be worse than forecast. The way it's written, it seems to make it more likely that CAP pilots will be flying missed approaches, which seems like an odd response to a pilot's inability to fly a missed approach safely.

"9.10.5.3.5. When established on any segment of the approach, should weather decrease below the minimums authorized by the flight release, the pilot in command is expected to abort the landing and continue on to the planned alternate airport or establish a holding pattern and wait until conditions again meet the above requirements. If conditions at available alternates and the primary airport do not improve or otherwise meet these requirements, pilots may exercise discretion and approach to published minimums."​

I have bad things to say and shall refrain. Not good.

 

[Chuck U. Farley]

This is clearly an old thread, and I was enthralled to read through but eventually got tired around page 10. WOW, there was a lot of really grumpy stuff here, and good information nonetheless. Nothing bad to say about the grumpys, we are all entitled to our own opinions. You can freely attack my ideas, and you should, but you do not have license to attack my character, a thin but very important line.

I have wanted to be a pilot since I was barely tall enough to walk. I am a former CAP cadet, and yah it was really geeky in high-school but at least I was big and bold enough that no one fu##ed with me. I learned how to march, snap to attention, and address my elders and "sir" or 'Ma'am", all good things. I endured, did my first solo in a glider at a CAP summer camp, then first solo in ASEL the following summer. From there I went onto college, did AFROTC for a year until I realized it was not a good fit for me, then tripped and fell into another career field.

I am very happy to enjoy aviation as a hobby and proud to have now just over 1500 hours TT ASEL as a private pilot. I am in a flying club that has a pretty good fleet and amazing hourly rates and I fly typically at least once/week.

I have recently been looking to get back involved with Civil Air Patrol, the local squadron is very active with ES missions and perhaps this will give me a greater sense of purpose for flying, and if nothing else, I will get the opportunity to fly in some very nice, well-equipped aircraft.

Oh, and the chicks... yah, you know what I'm talking about. the only thing better is having a boat during the summertime.

 

[GPaulHendo]

This is clearly an old thread, and I was enthralled to read through but eventually got tired around page 10. WOW, there was a lot of really grumpy stuff here, and good information nonetheless. Nothing bad to say about the grumpys, we are all entitled to our own opinions. You can freely attack my ideas, and you should, but you do not have license to attack my character, a thin but very important line.

Obviously I can't speak for anyone else but my critique (found on page 15) is based on my experience with CAP and the squadron I was in. Everything I said about my experience is 100% true and not just an opinion. What we all need to realize is every squadron is different and everyone is going to have a different experience whether it's positive and/or negative.

 

[airdale]

@Chuck, getting involved with CAP is kind of like buying a boat. The best days are the day you join and the day you quit. At the end of August I quit after 8 years. The management incompetence, particularly at the national level, and the relentless increase in bureaucratic nonsense finally did me in. It was a good day.

 

[Tantalum]

Thanks for the post @Chuck U. Farley welcome to PoA! I hope you don't take my responses personally or in a bad light, as that is definitely not my intention.. just my observations to your observations, and hopefully if someone at CAP is reading this it can be constructive

Oh, and the chicks... yah, you know what I'm talking about. the only thing better is having a boat during the summertime.

This could be tongue in cheek, sometimes hard to tell online, or maybe it is locally dependent, but in the 9 months or so I diligently went to CAP meetings I don't think I ever saw a female regular.. I would think there are better places to meet women than CAP meetings. This is a topic for another thread entirely, but few women my age seem to A.) care that I'm a pilot or B.) think it's cool. Most just ask "oh you work for an airliner?" and when you say no they are generally confused..

I have wanted to be a pilot since I was barely tall enough to walk. I am a former CAP cadet, and yah it was really geeky in high-school but at least I was big and bold enough that no one fu##ed with me. I learned how to march, snap to attention, and address my elders and "sir" or 'Ma'am", all good things. I endured, did my first solo in a glider at a CAP summer camp, then first solo in ASEL the following summer. From there I went onto college, did AFROTC for a year until I realized it was not a good fit for me, then tripped and fell into another career field.

Respecting adults ("elders") and addressing people professionally does not need to come from a military style organization. I was in the scouts and I agree that organizations like that do help give someone structure and discipline, but they're not requirements, and may even be detrimental from a social perspective by stripping away a lot of your autonomy. I know plenty of very respectful people who aren't from a military or similar background. This whole pseudo-military part of CAP was one of my big turnoffs. If the mission is to promote general aviation and use it to help the public good, etc., then it should be geared towards that. Assembling a ranking system and this whole pretend hierarchy doesn't do anything to help actually promote their mission. That's cool that you did your first solo in a glider, great way to learn about the principles of flight, etc., but you shouldn't have to "endure" something and wait multiple summers to get to your dream of flying. It is not a cheap hobby, but I managed to work my way through my PPL as a teenager just saving my money from the odd jobs, etc..

I have recently been looking to get back involved with Civil Air Patrol, the local squadron is very active with ES missions and perhaps this will give me a greater sense of purpose for flying, and if nothing else, I will get the opportunity to fly in some very nice, well-equipped aircraft.

This may be local, but out here there were some serious barriers to entry to fly their aircraft. A licensed, instrument rated pilot who flies 100+ hrs per year should be able to do a checkout like anyone else and be entitled to be on their roster to fly. If they have their own checkout training etc., that's fine.. (many clubs do require a certain amount of dual time for advanced aircraft like Bonanzas, etc.) but you shouldn't have to be filling out reams of paperwork and spend hours as a mission observer (basically sit in the back seat and get nauseous), etc. just to actually fly and be part of the mission. When I asked about actually flying their planes I was told to expect 6 months to 2 years... that's ridiculous

These aren't opinions, just my actual experiences with them. I was eager to meet a cool group of local pilots and do something to give back.. but I think I was probably the only non military guy in the meetings and the whole fake-air-force thing was a massive turnoff

It's a shame really, as I am sure there are some great guys out there and awesome squadrons.. oh well

not just an opinion. What we all need to realize is every squadron is different and everyone is going to have a different experience whether it's positive and/or negative.

Right on. Unfortunately it seems that the good squadrons are relatively few and far between, as it seems my experience was similar to many who replied to this thread

 

[Tantalum]

bureaucratic nonsense

yup!

 

[Eric Gleason]

That was changed nationally with the most recent CAPR 70-1:

“7.1.7. Unless otherwise noted by the CAP Check Pilot, all previous aircraft for which the pilot has an initial CAP Pilot Flight Evaluation are renewed at the time of the annual CAP Pilot Flight Evaluation. Check Pilots will confirm that pilots meet all requirements as outlined in other parts of this regulation prior to signing off completion of the CAPF 5 or CAPF 5B.”

This is incredible news! The G1000 plane seems to only come to town I'm not available, and I've been procrastinating because I didn't want to have to take 2 form 5 rides. This will help quite a bit. Thanks for mentioning it.

 

[ChrisK]

This is incredible news! The G1000 plane seems to only come to town I'm not available, and I've been procrastinating because I didn't want to have to take 2 form 5 rides. This will help quite a bit. Thanks for mentioning it.

Bad news. The G1000 is an endorsement that is required to be renewed annually via a demonstration of proficiency during a F5.

 

[Tantalum]

CAPR 70-1
CAPF 5
CAPF 5B
F5
...
case and point.. all to fly a basic fixed gear ASEL 172/182 you could rent from any semi-legit flight school. And G1000 is not that daunting.. a couple hours and a check out are sufficient to figure out how to switch radios and set up the navs, etc

I'll leave this thread alone, but I just don't get the appeal... AngelFlight, which arguably has more liability on their hands, is so much more streamlined and reasonable

 

[labbadabba]

This is clearly an old thread, and I was enthralled to read through but eventually got tired around page 10. WOW, there was a lot of really grumpy stuff here, and good information nonetheless. Nothing bad to say about the grumpys, we are all entitled to our own opinions. You can freely attack my ideas, and you should, but you do not have license to attack my character, a thin but very important line.

I have wanted to be a pilot since I was barely tall enough to walk. I am a former CAP cadet, and yah it was really geeky in high-school but at least I was big and bold enough that no one fu##ed with me. I learned how to march, snap to attention, and address my elders and "sir" or 'Ma'am", all good things. I endured, did my first solo in a glider at a CAP summer camp, then first solo in ASEL the following summer. From there I went onto college, did AFROTC for a year until I realized it was not a good fit for me, then tripped and fell into another career field.

I am very happy to enjoy aviation as a hobby and proud to have now just over 1500 hours TT ASEL as a private pilot. I am in a flying club that has a pretty good fleet and amazing hourly rates and I fly typically at least once/week.

I have recently been looking to get back involved with Civil Air Patrol, the local squadron is very active with ES missions and perhaps this will give me a greater sense of purpose for flying, and if nothing else, I will get the opportunity to fly in some very nice, well-equipped aircraft.

Oh, and the chicks... yah, you know what I'm talking about. the only thing better is having a boat during the summertime.

Where are you based? The Kansas wing is pretty accessible in terms of planes and I haven't uncovered too much BS (not more than expected anyway). But we've been flying some really cool missions with the Kansas Wing ANG and we've been seen as a valuable resource to active duty military here in the state so we get to feel useful. : )

 

[Sundancer]

CAPR 70-1
CAPF 5
CAPF 5B
F5
...
case and point.. all to fly a basic fixed gear ASEL 172/182 you could rent from any semi-legit flight school. And G1000 is not that daunting.. a couple hours and a check out are sufficient to figure out how to switch radios and set up the navs, etc

I'll leave this thread alone, but I just don't get the appeal... AngelFlight, which arguably has more liability on their hands, is so much more streamlined and reasonable

I stepped away from CAP in 2013, I think - not to keep beating it in the head, but they just can't get out of their own way. The stop, stumble and fall bureaucracy is coupled with some real sketchy ethics. I still don't discourage people from taking a look, as it does vary so much from squadron to squadron. Not too sorry I did it, but don't miss it, either.

 

[Bonchie]

CAPR 70-1
CAPF 5
CAPF 5B
F5
...
case and point.. all to fly a basic fixed gear ASEL 172/182 you could rent from any semi-legit flight school. And G1000 is not that daunting.. a couple hours and a check out are sufficient to figure out how to switch radios and set up the navs, etc

I'll leave this thread alone, but I just don't get the appeal... AngelFlight, which arguably has more liability on their hands, is so much more streamlined and reasonable

70-1 is just the overall general regs. A CAPF 5 and an F5 are just short for the same thing, i.e. a Form 5 evaluation ride. A CAPF 5B is an evaluation ride for...hot air balloons.

And correct, it does only take a few hours to get the G1000 down. It's not a separate ride or anything. When you take your annual Form 5, you just do it in a G1000 airplane and you are good to go. For all the downsides that are very real in CAP, staying in the air is really not that big of a deal. It's literally one ride, for one hour, once a year.

The real struggle is getting your flying paid for, not being qualified to fly a plane.

 

[Eric Gleason]

I'll leave this thread alone, but I just don't get the appeal... AngelFlight, which arguably has more liability on their hands, is so much more streamlined and reasonable

Challenging and interesting flying--some of it paid for--opportunities to work with sharp youth and give back a little to the community...

 

[OkieAviator]

Challenging and interesting flying--some of it paid for--opportunities to work with sharp youth and give back a little to the community...

Sweet opportunities for cosplay too!

 

[Palmpilot]

Sweet opportunities for cosplay too!

If that's your thing, you don't have to be a member of CAP to buy and wear CAP uniforms.

 

[ircphoenix]

AngelFlight, which arguably has more liability on their hands, is so much more streamlined and reasonable

Does AngelFlight have any liability? Private planes, private pilots, no? Not like you're going to show up at your local airport and use their plane, right?

Sent from my SM-G935T using Tapatalk

 

[Tantalum]

Does AngelFlight have any liability? Private planes, private pilots, no? Not like you're going to show up at your local airport and use their plane, right?

If you crash with an 8 year old cancer patient on board that's going to look a lot worse, optically, IMHO, for the organization (Angel Flight) than when the CAP guys can't fly a missed approach right.. and most rental outfits are fine with a checkout and the minimum of paperwork to fly their planes

 

[airdale]

Challenging and interesting flying ...

Really? That's not my experience. I am north of 1,000 hours with well over 100 airports and about 30 tail numbers in my logbook. Maybe 20% is CAP. I consider it to be a sort of sheltered workshop. No flying outside the state, very little instrument flying, solo IMC almost nonexistent. Weather planning is usually just looking out the window, a few METARs and maybe (gasp!) a TAF. Fuel planning is pretty much limited to carefully under-filling the 182s so you can carry more than two people.

Flying grids, expanding squares, etc is pretty boring once you've done it a few times. About the only interesting stuff is on the rare mission for the Air Force, like being a target dummy for F-16 intercept practice.

I will say I liked the annual Form 5 check rides. A good way to stay sharp and the IP is usually a friend so we can play around a little bit. One time I flew a VOR approach using only the G1000 RMI needles.