Pros/Cons of Joining the Civil Air Patrol?

flyinguy said:
Greg, I intend to do just that, but CAP won't get off that easy. I will also go rogue. I can't kill off CAP but with the help of others who have been as bitterly disappointed as I, we can organize a letter writing campaign and get the funding cut. It is just a colossal waste of money for taxpayers to buy and maintain all those aircraft, and pay for a mission that is no longer needed. Something like $37 million this year alone.

There are organizations that specialize in fighting taxpayer waste, and they need to know what is going on with CAP.

With $37 million, the Pentagon could have bought an entire box of hammers.
Click to expand...

So the only reason you joined CAP was to fly, and your feelings are hurt because you can't? So you're only choice is retaliation? How about doing something else in CAP? There's not much middle of the road opinion around here regarding CAP, only polarization.

As for the reference about JROTC, it's not as wide-spread as you might think. The goals of JROTC are not the same as cadet programs in CAP.
 
MAKG1 said:
You only have one airplane in your wing?

That was the reason given.

MO is not a requirement for a form 5. I found it helpful for avionics.

"Your plan to defund CAP?" Really? Delusions of grandeur are an excellent reason to exclude a member from aircrews. And I wouldn't fly with a pilot suffering that under any circumstances.

Part of a form 5 is demonstrating CAP procedures. A rental 172 could be used for a C mission, with wing approval and a form 73. Did you get it? They also have different W&B due to nearly 200 lb of CAP radios, DF, and the survival kit.
Click to expand...

Failure to recognize sarcasm is indicative of Aspergers. Probably also a good reason to exclude a member from aircrews. Are you by any chance Sheldon Cooper?

When I offered to pay for the rental 172, I was told by the gentleman coordinating things within my squadron "Ummmm...he doesn't like to do that, and the FIRST Form 5 has to be done in a CAP aircraft." Was I flat out lied to? I think so.

If enough people knew what was really going on, and let their congressmen and senators know that they knew, the appropriations would shrink. And that part is no delusion. Government programs and wars are onky ended when they cost more votes than they get for those who support them.

McCain for one already does not like CAP for some reason.
 
murphey said:
So the only reason you joined CAP was to fly, and your feelings are hurt because you can't? So you're only choice is retaliation? How about doing something else in CAP? There's not much middle of the road opinion around here regarding CAP, only polarization.

As for the reference about JROTC, it's not as wide-spread as you might think. The goals of JROTC are not the same as cadet programs in CAP.
Click to expand...

Well, JROTC programs can be started as easily as CAP squadrons can, especially if CAP money was given to that instead. No transportation costs, higher educational level of those teaching it. Better all around. I have a son who is in his last year of AFJROTC so I am familiar enough with both programs.

Flying was the main reason I joined, which goes back to my first post, which basically said not to join if you are a pilot. Ironically, many of you who are sniping at me are saying almost what I said. Some do fly quite a bit, but a chosen few. They keep the others out of the cockpit.
I am indeed angry and hurt.

I think maybe it should be renamed the Civil Patrol, not much air in it and in a few years none when drones take over. The Real Air Force has had more drone pilots than actual pilots for years, so the writing is on the wall for CAP.

I have done other things in CAP, and at this time still do. Got up in the middle of the night to drive a vanload of cadets a long way more than once. In fact, all CAP pilots are supposed to have staff jobs also but that is not enforced in my wing.

There is a lot that the public does not know about what CAP does. Thankfully Operation Drop-In was quietly killed when many CAP members refused to participate. Anyone remember that?
 
Last edited:
To use a member furnished airplane on a CAP mission -- and an initial Form 5 is a C7 -- you must, among other things, get approval from Wing. They are not required to give it to you. In fact, it almost never happens -- so you weren't lied to. This is in 60-1. You're not ready if you aren't familiar.

If you want to play with their toys, you have to play by their rules.

Many wings have 60-1 supplements. That might prohibit it outright. At this moment, CAWG doesn't have one, but it will soon. But you're not in CAWG if you're looking for a 172 form 5 'cause CAWG doesn't have any.

I see a terrible attitude of entitlement, and I'm not surprised you're having trouble.

I generally don't advise people to join just for free flying, as that's not the point of the organization, and it is not valued much, particularly if it comes with entitlement.

Which wing are you in that has only one airplane? Guam?
 
Last edited:
flyinguy said:
My F5 requests are never turned down, they just never respond at all. I have now been waiting for a checkride nearly as long as US involvement in WWII.
Click to expand...

Who's "they"? Did you contact a check pilot directly?

If I can show that it is a private flying club, especially when the Federal budget is being put together, that would go a long way towards defunding CAP.
Click to expand...

Considering the restrictions on what CAP aircraft can be used for, it would make a pretty poor substitute for a flying club.
 
MAKG1 said:
To use a member furnished airplane on a CAP mission -- and an initial Form 5 is a C7 -- you must, among other things, get approval from Wing. They are not required to give it to you. In fact, it almost never happens -- so you weren't lied to. This is in 60-1. You're not ready if you aren't familiar.

If you want to play with their toys, you have to play by their rules.

Many wings have 60-1 supplements. That might prohibit it outright. At this moment, CAWG doesn't have one, but it will soon. But you're not in CAWG if you're looking for a 172 form 5 'cause CAWG doesn't have any.

I see a terrible attitude of entitlement, and I'm not surprised you're having trouble.

I generally don't advise people to join just for free flying, as that's not the point of the organization, and it is not valued much, particularly if it comes with entitlement.

Which wing are you in that has only one airplane? Guam?
Click to expand...

60-1 I believe says that a non CAP aircraft can be used if a CAP aircraft is not available. I was told it was not. What would you have done? That was two years ago, and I rented that 172 anyway to do the flight review.

Did you wait that long for a Form 5?

As far as a "terrible attitude of entitlement", it is more like a terrible attitude of being finally fed up. I kept removing reasons and still never got it. But you are going to portray me any way that suits your prejudices. CAP, noble and intrepid defenders of freedom and shutter offers of errant ELTs on ramps, of course can not have acted like a private flying club operated at taxpayer expense, this guy must be in the wrong.
There is another aspect of it that I have not mentioned; a squadron commander who had lost his medical with no hope of ever getting it back, and who went ballistic if someone else flew. He had issues and is no longer with CAP, but that is one of the things I dealt with.
In fact not one person in either of the two squadrons I have served in has got their initial Form 5 while I was there, so it is not just me.




.
 
flyinguy said:
60-1 I believe says that a non CAP aircraft can be used if a CAP aircraft is not available.
Click to expand...

If you can get the approval of your wing commander:

CAPR 60-1 Section 2-4g excerpt:

"The use of member owned/furnished aircraft, with the exception of gliders and balloons, requires wing or higher commander approval for corporate missions and CAP-USAF Liaison Region commander or higher approval for each AFAM in which the aircraft’s use is requested."​

There is another aspect of it that I have not mentioned; a squadron commander who had lost his medical with no hope of ever getting it back, and who went ballistic if someone else flew. He had issues and is no longer with CAP, but that is one of the things I dealt with.
In fact not one person in either of the two squadrons I have served in has got their initial Form 5 while I was there, so it is not just me.
Click to expand...

Having been a CAP member for over twenty years, I have heard many stories that lead me to conclude that there is a lot of variation in how things are run in different wings.
 
I was looking over my posts, and my bitterness at having wasted several years of my life on CAP is coming through too much.
There are a few good things I could say about it. I have seen ambitious cadets do well in the program, they can go as far as they want with it. CAP is serious about protecting them from abuse, and I saw none of that and heard about none. I do know of one relationship between a cadet and a senior member, that began when both were cadets. Leadership was aware of it and the couple were very discreet about it. The cadet program is overall a good introduction to a military way of doing thngs.
Senior members tended to fall in to one of several categories: parents of cadet members, former military who wanted to somehow still be a part of it in some way, uniform freaks-guys who loved wearing a uniform, (often were security guards or EMTs or volunteer firemen as well), a very few people on a power trip (who gravitated towards command positions), pilots (smallest category in both of my squadrons). And a few people who were there for unknown reasons.

This will be my last post on the subject: My detractors on this board say "Don't join for the flying". I said "Don't join if you are a pilot." Those two statements are fairly close, so at least we agree on something.
 
I've been a member, they wasted my time.

Problem, as I see it, isn't their mission, its the people CAP attracts. People who are more interested in titles and playing wannabe commander crap.

If you're looking to do some good and save money flying, look into a Coast Guard Aux with a flying wing. They cover fuel and some hourly mx on your own plane.
 
MAKG1 said:
To use a member furnished airplane on a CAP mission -- and an initial Form 5 is a C7 -- you must, among other things, get approval from Wing. They are not required to give it to you. In fact, it almost never happens -- so you weren't lied to. This is in 60-1. You're not ready if you aren't familiar.
Click to expand...

There is no need to use a CAP aircraft on a F5...no need to put it in WMIRS at all.
 
JeffDG said:
There is no need to use a CAP aircraft on a F5...no need to put it in WMIRS at all.
Click to expand...
I suspect that most wings want to increase their afam aircraft usage so strongly encourage F5s to be flown in corporate aircraft on B missions (for good reason). I know strongly encourage is different than require, but in an organization where you take an oath and wear a uniform, they are often the same thing.
 
flyinguy said:
I was looking over my posts, and my bitterness at having wasted several years of my life on CAP is coming through too much.
There are a few good things I could say about it. I have seen ambitious cadets do well in the program, they can go as far as they want with it. CAP is serious about protecting them from abuse, and I saw none of that and heard about none. I do know of one relationship between a cadet and a senior member, that began when both were cadets. Leadership was aware of it and the couple were very discreet about it. The cadet program is overall a good introduction to a military way of doing thngs.
Senior members tended to fall in to one of several categories: parents of cadet members, former military who wanted to somehow still be a part of it in some way, uniform freaks-guys who loved wearing a uniform, (often were security guards or EMTs or volunteer firemen as well), a very few people on a power trip (who gravitated towards command positions), pilots (smallest category in both of my squadrons). And a few people who were there for unknown reasons.

This will be my last post on the subject: My detractors on this board say "Don't join for the flying". I said "Don't join if you are a pilot." Those two statements are fairly close, so at least we agree on something.
Click to expand...


I checked out a couple of wings as I moved about over the last couple of decades. Seemed to me the overwhelming majority were uniform freaks.
 
I'm a new member and saw this thread and thought I'd add a comment. I work in state government aviation and have been in situations where CAP was involved, i.e. disaster exercises, etc. Most aviation organizations don't like dealing with CAP. I encounter them while flying at work and have adopted the realization that if my life depends on them finding me in a downed aircraft, I'm a dead man. There are better places to pursue your interest in aviation.
 
Manche59 said:
I'm a new member and saw this thread and thought I'd add a comment. I work in state government aviation and have been in situations where CAP was involved, i.e. disaster exercises, etc. Most aviation organizations don't like dealing with CAP. I encounter them while flying at work and have adopted the realization that if my life depends on them finding me in a downed aircraft, I'm a dead man. There are better places to pursue your interest in aviation.
Click to expand...

After the Northridge Quake in LA, there were quite a few of us flying diapers, baby formula, toilet paper, and water from Ontario to Long Beach in our planes. I can't recall one CAP plane in the lines.
 
Last summer I had a frantic old CAP guy approach me on the wash rack saying he had to check my ELT because there was a reported 121.5 beacon in the area. I told him not to bother since I had a 406. He went all school teacher and explained that a 406 co-transmits on 121.5. I told him I knew that but if my 406 was going off the RCC (rescue coordination center) would have identified the beacon as mine and would have called me. And they hadn't. He had no idea what I was talking about. I let him wave his magic wand around my plane and he was off to irritate the next live body he could find.

The CAP would be a good place for the Feds to cut the pork budget.
 
When we did the NLE (National Level Exercise) for the New Madrid plan, we (state aviation) filled all the spots needed for GA aircraft, e.g. airborne repeater for post quake radio coverage, airfield damage assessments in conjunction with the Air Guard C130 wing, and miscellaneous needs that could be filled with single / medium twin fixed wing and small rotor wing support. CAP sent one guy to one meeting and disappeared after that. My takeaway was that it was pretty strange.... Really not sure what our tax money does there.
 
Manche59 said:
When we did the NLE (National Level Exercise) for the New Madrid plan, we (state aviation) filled all the spots needed for GA aircraft, e.g. airborne repeater for post quake radio coverage, airfield damage assessments in conjunction with the Air Guard C130 wing, and miscellaneous needs that could be filled with single / medium twin fixed wing and small rotor wing support. CAP sent one guy to one meeting and disappeared after that. My takeaway was that it was pretty strange.... Really not sure what our tax money does there.
Click to expand...
Pm me please. I want to help fix that.
 
I had briefly looked into getting involved in CAP to hopefully get involved in a good organization do some good things and fly for cheap. Sadly it sounds like none of those match up with CAP.

Probably just another part of aviation that will die due to too much bureaucracy.
 
Don't know if it will die as long as we're paying for it. If you're anywhere close to getting a CFI, that's what I'd recommend to get you flying more. I'm working on mine as I get closer to retirement for a few different reasons. Want to stay active beyond flying for fun.
 
Manche59 said:
Don't know if it will die as long as we're paying for it. If you're anywhere close to getting a CFI, that's what I'd recommend to get you flying more. I'm working on mine as I get closer to retirement for a few different reasons. Want to stay active beyond flying for fun.
Click to expand...

True it may not die due to funding but in my opinion age will become a bigger factor. At least from my experience young people like me don't care for all of that crap. As it's members get older the organization will die off from lack of involvement. As others have said there are many other ways the government can do the job of CAP.

Now if they change their mindset to here are the rules let us help you meet them. They might have a chance. Until then is sounds like a good ol boys club using the taxpayers dollars.
 
You may be absolutely right. I maintain two general truths; I don't know what I don't know, and I surely don't know everything. Since I have no reason to interface with their organization, I have no clue what they do or how they do it. One thing I have witnessed is there never seems to be a shortage of retired or semi retired military people to fly those aircraft. That may be a reason why people from civil aviation don't seem to end up, flying CAP airplanes.
 
I went back after a long hiatus thinking I'd keep my mouth shut about knowing how radios work.

Instead I ended up a Squadron Comm Officer and later the Wing DCE (Director of Communications Engineering).

When the DC I liked working for, announced he was stepping down, I took it as my only chance to bail and announced the same.

Turned in the gear, a resignation, and ran away screaming.

National membership expires end of this month. I'm done again. This time, for good. Only way I'll ever go back is as a retired guy with a CFI rating. At least one of those and maybe both won't happen in the next twenty years.
 
MAKG1 said:
Jeez, dude. You're a member. You don't need a FOIA request. Log into WMIRS and look.

Maybe you're not getting responses because it's obvious you're not ready. Prior to your F5, you are supposed to be familiar with CAPR 60-1. It's all in there.

Remember, you are asking for some 10 hours of free flight instruction if you include G1000 transition training. IMO, prohibiting CFI charges in CAP planes is a mistake, and it makes for instructor shortages.

You may have to do some legwork to find instruction. You're asking for free instruction. You can do it anywhere in the state. With approval, even out of state. I had to do mine in Oakland, a near two hour drive. But I got it done.

Much of CAP is proving you're not a wanker out for free flying time. People need to know they can depend on you. And with the attitude you show here, I would NOT trust you in an aircrew.

I'm not entirely sure you understand what "qualified aircrew" means. Which positions? None of them are relevant for F5, though MO can help with some avionics proficiency.
Click to expand...


That's bizarre... The wing here claimed I needed to progress from MO= Mission Observer / back seat, to MS = Mission scanner / right front seat, to even qualify to test in using the form 5 for MP= Mission Pilot....

:confused::confused::confused:......
 
N801BH said:
That's bizarre... The wing here claimed I needed to progress from MO= Mission Observer / back seat, to MS = Mission scanner / right front seat, to even qualify to test in using the form 5 for MP= Mission Pilot....

:confused::confused::confused:......
Click to expand...

You need to be a "Mission Scanner" (back seat) first, but there is no requirement to be a Mission Observer (front seat) before pursuing your Mission Pilot.

There's no requirement for any aircrew ES position (MS or MO) before taking your Form 5 checkride to become a CAP Pilot. There are many pilots who have no MS/MO/MP qualifications, and fly solely for proficiency or things like Cadet Orientation Rides.
 
N801BH said:
That's bizarre... The wing here claimed I needed to progress from MO= Mission Observer / back seat, to MS = Mission scanner / right front seat, to even qualify to test in using the form 5 for MP= Mission Pilot....

:confused::confused::confused:......
Click to expand...

One thing I noticed checking out several wings across the country, they are all their own little fiefdom.
 
JeffDG said:
You need to be a "Mission Scanner" (back seat) first, but there is no requirement to be a Mission Observer (front seat) before pursuing your Mission Pilot.

There's no requirement for any aircrew ES position (MS or MO) before taking your Form 5 checkride to become a CAP Pilot. There are many pilots who have no MS/MO/MP qualifications, and fly solely for proficiency or things like Cadet Orientation Rides.
Click to expand...

Interesting.. even though I got the positions mixed up, I think....
The wing here demands multiple SAREX's to even ask for a Form 5..:rolleyes:
 
JeffDG said:
You need to be a "Mission Scanner" (back seat) first, but there is no requirement to be a Mission Observer (front seat) before pursuing your Mission Pilot.
.
Click to expand...

Depends on the wing. Some require MO before anyone can go for MP training. They also complain that they dont have enough MPs.
 
N801BH said:
That's bizarre... The wing here claimed I needed to progress from MO= Mission Observer / back seat, to MS = Mission scanner / right front seat, to even qualify to test in using the form 5 for MP= Mission Pilot....

:confused::confused::confused:......
Click to expand...

Form 5 is not MP. Form 91 is. CAP likes forms.
 
N801BH said:
Interesting.. even though I got the positions mixed up, I think....
The wing here demands multiple SAREX's to even ask for a Form 5..:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Altho wings are somewhat autonomous, I'd contact Region and ask for "clarification". If nothing else, it would annoy the WY wing.
 
Henning said:
One thing I noticed checking out several wings across the country, they are all their own little fiefdom.
Click to expand...

It goes further down than the wings..."each squadron has its own personality" is the polite version.
 
weilke said:
Depends on the wing. Some require MO before anyone can go for MP training. They also complain that they dont have enough MPs.
Click to expand...
Well, those wings are in violation of CAP regulations which are quite clear that the prerequisite for MP is either MS or MO, not both.
 
N801BH said:
Interesting.. even though I got the positions mixed up, I think....
The wing here demands multiple SAREX's to even ask for a Form 5..:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Yeah, they're in violation of regs then. There's no prerequisite for any ES participation to be a pilot whatsoever. As an ES person myself, I certainly encourage it, but I'd never even hint that it was a requirement.
 
Henning said:
One thing I noticed checking out several wings across the country, they are all their own little fiefdom.
Click to expand...

Each runs their own way.

Some are as you say, run as a fiefdom. Others are run more sensibly. Confirmation bias leads to the bad ones being the better known.
 
JeffDG said:
Each runs their own way.

Some are as you say, run as a fiefdom. Others are run more sensibly. Confirmation bias leads to the bad ones being the better known.
Click to expand...

I admit, I have heard that some are run well which is why I keep looking when I move, I just haven't been in one of their areas, I always seem to find myself at a meeting where the 7/8th of the discussion revolved around uniforms. :rolleyes2:
 
JeffDG said:
Well, those wings are in violation of CAP regulations which are quite clear that the prerequisite for MP is either MS or MO, not both.
Click to expand...

Is there a reg that pre-empts wing level rulemaking on this ?
 
weilke said:
Is there a reg that pre-empts wing level rulemaking on this ?
Click to expand...

CAPR 60-3, 1-2
1-2. Supplements and Waivers. Supplements to this regulation cannot be issued below the wing level (except Congressional Squadron) and require region commander, NHQ CAP/DO, and CAP-USAF/XO approval. Requests for waivers or supplements must be submitted via chain of command to the CAP and CAP-USAF region commanders and then to NHQ CAP/DO for further consideration
Click to expand...

CAPR 60-1
1-2. Supplements, Operating Instructions, and Waivers. Supplements, operating instructions (OI) and waivers to this regulation cannot be issued below the wing level (except Congressional Squadron). Wing supplements, OIs and waivers to this regulation require coordination for
approval in the following order: CAP wing commander, CAP region Commander, CAPUSAF/LR,CAP-USAF/XO, NHQ/DOV and NHQ/DO approval. Supplements, OIs and waivers from the Congressional Squadron (NHQ-999) must be submitted through the National Chief of Staff and to the CAP-USAF MELR/CC for approval. Supplement, OI and waiver coordination will be accomplished via e-mail with a MS Word file attachment.
Click to expand...

All supplements are published either for either 60-1 or 60-3

None of them make any mention of the items suggested.
 
Henning said:
I admit, I have heard that some are run well which is why I keep looking when I move, I just haven't been in one of their areas, I always seem to find myself at a meeting where the 7/8th of the discussion revolved around uniforms. :rolleyes2:
Click to expand...

Yup. Even within a wing. There are some squadron pretty much like what you've experienced, and others who only ask that everyone wear some type of proper uniform when a special event occurs. Cadet squadrons excepted, of course.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top