Mark,

First, let me add my sincere condolences. Your daughter's story had a profound effect on me. I live in Wyoming, only a few hours from the crash site, I help with SAR work, and I have a young son and a 9-year-old daughter. It broke my heart to learn the details surrounding the crash, and I can't begin to imagine the pain you have experienced as a result of all of this.

I agree with Flynengr's statement above and Rob's statement about pax briefing. The biggest practical impact this has had on me is that (i) I take the time to tell my passengers what to do and how to do it if they need help and I'm incapacitated; and (ii) I intend to upgrade to a 406 ELT (in addition to the SPOT I already carry). Like many others on this board, your daughter's situation left me feeling totally helpless at the time, but determined to try and make sure I never put myself, or my passengers, in a situation like that. Ultimately, the responsibility begins and ends with the pilot. However, all of us, whether high-time or just beginning, are still learning each time we fly. Consequently all of us, whether high-time or just beginning, will make mistakes at one time or another. Sadly, some mistakes cost much more than others. How we plan, how we fly, how we communicate, the equipment we carry, and the decisions we make can all help us avoid mistakes. Of equal or greater value, however, is the role those factors can play in helping to keep the cost of our mistakes as small as possible.

I commend and respect you for wanting to help make changes to avoid another terrible situation like this. You have already advanced that cause by initiating this discussion. However, I strongly agree with the previous posters that government regulated flight plans are not the answer we need. Instead, I think it is much more important that pilots think about and internalize what lessons we can learn from this tragedy (I still remember the float plane video too, which did a very effective job of delivering the message). Properly briefing pax, having the right locating equipment and survival gear, communicating our intentions--all of these things are important and tangible lessons that can be taught, internalized, and benefited from much more than any supposed benefit from additional government regulation regarding flight plans. I would urge you to pour your efforts into educating other pilots about the impact of their decisions on their non-pilot passengers and those left waiting at home when the plane turns up overdue.

I also think it is important that we continue to have a constructive dialogue about how best to help those in need, without the discussion devolving into a shouting contest between pro-CAP and anti-CAP mobs. I'm not pro-CAP or anti-CAP. I just know if it was my little girl out there (something I have thought about many times since this tragedy), I would want everyone available doing everything they could to find and help her in the most effective manner possible--and I would want the discussion about how best to do that to have occurred long before, rather than on-the-fly in the middle of the emergency.

I hope you are able to take some small comfort in the fact that your daughter's story, and this discussion, have already had an important impact on many of us out here and how we prepare for our flights. Once again, I'm very sorry for your loss.

Let me remind our anonymous CAP contributor of this statement I made:

My comments are not meant to denigrate the many good people in the CAP. But generally speaking, they are not a lot better at SAR than any of us are, especially if we know the area in which an airplane is likely to have gone down.

I have friends in the CAP, and I know there are good people in there. But many of us choose not to get involved for our own reasons, not out of any dislike of the organization per se. For me, I spent 5+ years on active duty with the USAF, and I really don't care to wear a uniform and have to salute someone whose rank is the only thing "above" me, when I have more flight experience, probably more SAR experience, and more real military experience. Too many CAPers are not as devoted to the real purposes of the CAP as they should be, being instead military wannabees hung up on artificial protocol rather than doing the job for which the organization was formed. Enough of that digression.

I see no reason at all why experienced pilots who know the area can't be taught, very, very quickly, the most effective means of patrolling a search grid. It certainly isn't rocket science. Granted that some well-meaning pilots might get in the way, but instead of a "no entry" approach, why not a cooperative approach? Honestly, if you think it's not possible to safely put a whole bunch of airplanes into the air at the same time, I invite you to fly into OSH in July. Wouldn't it have been better to divide up the search area into segments and allow others to look, also? But concentrating the search using only a few CAP airplanes in the wrong place of a humongous TFR is exactly why people died. And that's so very unfortunate. We, the flying community, deserve better, and with a little cooperation instead of political back-bowing, that could happen.

Last year, there were many horrible fires in our area, and the cooperation of diverse groups, and even "civilians", was admirable and instrumental in saving lives and property. Right now in Moore, OK, the cooperation among "officialdom" and private citizens is helping to reduce the effects of the tragedy.

That's what the aviation community needs, cooperation between all of the affected groups, not an "us vs. them" mentality which hurts rather than helps.

Cary

Cary wrote:Honestly, if you think it's not possible to safely put a whole bunch of airplanes into the air at the same time, I invite you to fly into OSH in July.

I may not be as optimistic as you that people who haven't done SAR before can be that useful, but I certainly agree that this question is one to ask about whether TFRs are necessary or, at least, necessary in their current form.

CAVU wrote:On the legislative front, there's no need to mandate filing of flight plans. The ADS-B mandate will render VFR flight plans completely superfluous as of 2020. Anyone who uses their airplane to travel will be legally required to install a transponder that broadcasts GPS position, speed and altitude on two frequencies. ATC will have a near real-time track for every aircraft so equipped. That's far superior to any VFR flight plan as an SAR resource CAVU

Actually, the ONLY airspace that will require ADS-B out effective in 2020 is Class A, B, and C airspace, which is a TINY fraction of the airspace in this country. I could fly for the next ten years and never enter one of those types of airspace and it wouldn't break my heart. A LOT of flying in this country goes on outside that airspace.

This is a common misconception of what ADS-B will actually do in 2020.

MTV

The average time to find a crash on a VFR flight plan, 121.5 ELT alone (no flight following) is still measured in days, not hours. 406 ELT's are likely helping that statistic, although I can't find a good source to find out by how much.

It's not clear to me that decisions to TFR remote, barely populated, completely empty-sky search areas are driven by actual incidents or risks from using volunteer pilots. I'd like to hear from SAR folks on this, but in a business where minutes and hours count, I can think of several SAR ops (in the lower 48) where the accident site was identified first by volunteer SAR participants.

If I were a family member of a accident victim, I would not be able to contain myself if I found out that opaque, scattered SAR efforts were as broken as it was reported to be in this case. As for liability, what about the accountability or liability of not notifying local or county law enforcement/emergency services of a crash, turning down offers of willing assistance with ground search assets, or flat out forgetting or delaying the initiation of a real search? There has been scant but infuriating reportage along these lines...the press gets things wrong, but there was also a lack of followup from the SAR folks. I cannot help but believe encouraging broader participation of volunteers might have brought closure to this tragedy sooner, or even changed the outcome.

As for criticism of the CAP directly, I think the frustration is with the exclusion of volunteers and the organizational opaqueness the CAP brings to a very public situation when a plane goes down. I know for a fact that the CAP can attract and retain some of the best, most committed, and capable volunteers who give a great deal of their time from families and other activities to further their mission- I am deeply appreciative of their efforts. There are also *some* who seek out the CAP for other, wrong reasons that I don't give a hoot about. I am confused by the lack of interest to augment incredibly limited SAR resources with outside folks that can help as well, when there is no discernible downside.

As for trying to become a CAP member, I tried when I was in high school (and even had my own ragwing and PPL by then). I was motivated by an SAR in which a non-CAP volunteer pilot had located a 210 crash near Naturita, Colorado, just as the weather was breaking, well before the CAP could bring itself to walk outside and see the blue sky overhead to resume its search. Afterwards, I wanted to learn how to be a part of SAR activities, and was informed that polishing my boots and standing at attention were the only things I could expect to learn from the CAP as a newcomer, and that my SAR motivations were something to be left to an opaque, chain-smoking elite. It was really weird. I know things are different here on the front range, and I know a few folks in the local unit that I admire for the work they do. But incidents like this one get my hackles ruffled up. If the resources of an organization that should be the bottom line in SAR response and effectiveness cannot do better than concerned citizens who are acting as if it were their own loved ones every time, it is time to have a conversation about how to make things better.

I wish the kind folks in the CAP could focus less on admonishments of "Its damn risky..." and more on the "Yes, CAP has its limitations and hoops to jump through...".

mtv wrote:Actually, the ONLY airspace that will require ADS-B out effective in 2020 is Class A, B, and C airspace, which is a TINY fraction of the airspace in this country.

MTV

That's not what the Final rule says.

“Generally, this equipment will be required for aircraft operating in Classes A, B, and C airspace, certain Class E airspace, and other specified airspace. See section C.1. ‘‘Airspace’’ below for additional details.”

Section C.1:

“1. Airspace
This final rule prescribes ADS–B Out performance requirements for all aircraft operating in Class A, B, and C airspace within the NAS; above the ceiling and within the lateral boundaries of a Class B or Class C airspace area up to 10,000 feet mean sea level (MSL); and Class E airspace areas at or above 10,000 feet MSL over the 48 contiguous United States and the District of Columbia, excluding the airspace at and below 2,500 feet above the surface. ”

Here's the link: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2010-05-28/pdf/2010-12645.pdf

Hedge hopping might be fine for traveling some parts of the country, but not in the West. Want to fly from Reno to Salt Lake below 10,000 msl on a summer afternoon? Bring extra sick sacks.

CAVU

ADSB only works above a certain altitude as a tracking device. My 1946 cub is not required to have ADSB-out because I dont have to have a transponder - but I will be complying anyway. I think all this equipment could be substantially cheaper if the TSO/337/PMA process were overhauled - particularly for avionics. Pilots need to brief passengers - even little ones on emergency procedures - so there needs to be communication and training

A Trig TT21 mode-s transponder is $2300, which can be interfaced to any waas-enabled gps device (like the garmin 396/496 etc - can be had for $1000), which can also be interfaced to the ACK 406 ELT which is under $600.

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/trigtt21.php

http://www.aircraftspruce.com/catalog/avpages/elt406.php?clickkey=3780

http://compare.ebay.com/like/330924916543?var=lv&ltyp=AllFixedPriceItemTypes&var=sbar

Another note from the CAP pilot:

Greetings to all!

I am the 'Anonymous CAP friend' that rw2 mentioned. I apologize for not being able to post this myself. But as was already mentioned, the site is moving and they've turned off User Registration until after the move.

Next, my condolences on the loss of Mark's daughter. I have a 12-year old son, and I can only imagine the devastation of losing a child.

To answer Mark's original question and as a veteran SAR pilot, I wholeheartedly support people filing a flight plan whenever their flights take them 50+ miles from origin. It's the cheapest insurance policy out there and if something goes wrong, it gives SAR a place to start. CAP already requires us to file flight plans at anytime we're flying 50+ miles from origin. It's just become habit to do it whether I'm flying for myself or CAP.

Next, yes, TFRs are there for more than just keeping the airspace clear. Please consider whether you want a news helicopter broadcasting bodies at a crash site over live TV if they were your relatives. It does control the airspace so you don't have looky-loos and other aircraft that don't belong there out of the area. For those who say that they should be able to go help, I say yes...if you're trained to do it. Someone brought up training private pilots the very basics in doing search grids. I'm in support of this in cases where the training is standardized and you're putting yourself in a database where you're shown to be trained so that you can be called upon as an SAR asset. I think that's what people are generally suggesting. Anyone who has ever flown an SAR sortie knows that there is more to it than getting up in the air and looking out the window. They could also tell you what the realistic target detection probabilities are anytime you're conducting a search. Remind me again how long it took to find Steve Fosset and how many SAR resources were out there looking for him as well as HOW he was found?

There's always going to be bureaucracy of some kind when it comes to SAR. Militaries are bureaucratic machines. CAP belongs to the Air Force, so are subject to Air Force regulations and protocol. It's just the nature of the beast.

My comments originally were simply observations and opinions based on what I read and was asked to comment on them. Had I known the comments would be directly posted here, I would have worded them a little more eloquently and not come across as arrogant. But they are still valid opinions.

I don't want this thread to digress into a pro-CAP anti-CAP discussion either. It's widely accepted that there are good arguments on both sides of the fence. I can't say that I've seen any stated here, but the arguments are out there. The fact of the matter is that when you get 30,000 adults together, you're going to collect a few jerks. There are far fewer than that here and I've already experienced one. Unfortunately those jerks tend to cast a bad light on the organization they represent. They tend to overcast the good and well-meaning pilots we have here and in organizations like CAP.

The admonishment of "damn risky" was there and said in the same manner as I would admonish a pilot for going and buzzing a friend's house to show off. Then Cary later stated that he's a veteran SAR pilot. So the admonishment loses its bite, but also illustrates a point. How would someone, me included, know his experience and training at a glance? People are suggesting that everyone should get in on the action and get up in the air and help look. Ask yourself if you really want untrained pilots up in the air doing such things.

Nowadays, with the advent of SPOT trackers, EPERBs, 406 Beacons, and other technologies, the need to conduct visual searches are becoming less and less. In CAP, the focus on doing actual visual searches and SAR is making way more for disaster relief and aerial photo reconnaissance type of missions in support of Emergency Management Agencies like FEMA and their State counterparts. The needs are just plain changing.

At any rate, thank you for your time, and I shall join this forum when the registration process is back up and running. I will register under the name CAP_Pilot if its available, and would be happy to discuss the good points and bad points of CAP with anyone who is interested in having that conversation.

Warmest Regards,
CAP_Pilot

rw2 wrote:Another note from the CAP pilot:

(snip) People are suggesting that everyone should get in on the action and get up in the air and help look. Ask yourself if you really want untrained pilots up in the air doing such things.

CAP_Pilot

Yes, if my daughter was suffering from hypothermia at a crash site, I want everybody with a hang glider, ultralight, 150, 182, 206, Gippsland Airvan, F-22, CIA surveillance satellite, camera-equipped R/C helicopter, and Predator drone up there looking for her.

With all respects... ask yourself if you really believe CAP is the one and only legitimate option for SAR, and that nobody else has a significant chance of locating a lost or crashed person.

Again with sincere respect and admiration for the CAP mission, it appears that despite the official party line or pro-CAP sentiments, the CAP's official, inflexible position of "stand back, we're professionals" does not work all the time, and did not work in this situaiton.

I'm not against CAP. I have a good friend who is involved, and has participated in successful SAR. What
I am against is any sort of elitist mentality that is institutionalized and on an organization-wide scale. The small percentage of "jerks" in CAP is not my concern here.

The only problem I have is with the idea that CAP, and only CAP can do the job, and that lives should be put at further risk when time is critical, to make time so that CAP can come in and do things in a slow, orderly, squared away, controlled, military manner.

But chaos in the air, mid-airs, confusion, and 50 CAP and civilian airplanes interfering with each other is also a good way for someone to not get rescued. That is why I suggested coordination between CAP and non-CAP aircraft. An aircraft orbiting at altitude, and acting like an AWACS, or Forward Air Controller, or whatever those functions are called today, can "manage" the search.

CAP airplanes can search their quadrants, without any interference from non-CAP pilots. Local volunteers can search their quadrants, again not having to worry about swapping paint with the CAP. With the modern GPS applications and an iPad, search areas can be easily identified and airplanes kept separate. The most basic radio call signs and protocols can be set up. Not brain surgery.

Mark,
I just wanted to add my condolences to you and your family. I was heart broken reading details of your daughters story. I too fly with my kids as many people do. But the story of your daughter was the reason I bought a 406 PLB. I can't say that I know much about the CAP and the issues it does or does not have. But your story has already changed the way I fly.

Short CAP story. At one time I thought I'd like to belong. Met the local Ranking CAP officer at an air show. I asked about joining. He never asked about my experience ( comm, SEL, inst, tailwheel, HP, 500+ hrs. Said " Get a haircut and MAYBE I'll talk to you". No thanks, I already have enough self important A-Holes to deal with.

EZFlap wrote:

rw2 wrote:Another note from the CAP pilot:

(snip) People are suggesting that everyone should get in on the action and get up in the air and help look. Ask yourself if you really want untrained pilots up in the air doing such things.

CAP_Pilot

Yes, if my daughter was suffering from hypothermia at a crash site, I want everybody with a hang glider, ultralight, 150, 182, 206, Gippsland Airvan, F-22, CIA surveillance satellite, camera-equipped R/C helicopter, and Predator drone up there looking for her.

With all respects... ask yourself if you really believe CAP is the one and only legitimate option for SAR, and that nobody else has a significant chance of locating a lost or crashed person.

Again with sincere respect and admiration for the CAP mission, it appears that despite the official party line or pro-CAP sentiments, the CAP's official, inflexible position of "stand back, we're professionals" does not work all the time, and did not work in this situaiton.

I'm not against CAP. I have a good friend who is involved, and has participated in successful SAR. What
I am against is any sort of elitist mentality that is institutionalized and on an organization-wide scale. The small percentage of "jerks" in CAP is not my concern here.

The only problem I have is with the idea that CAP, and only CAP can do the job, and that lives should be put at further risk when time is critical, to make time so that CAP can come in and do things in a slow, orderly, squared away, controlled, military manner.

But chaos in the air, mid-airs, confusion, and 50 CAP and civilian airplanes interfering with each other is also a good way for someone to not get rescued. That is why I suggested coordination between CAP and non-CAP aircraft. An aircraft orbiting at altitude, and acting like an AWACS, or Forward Air Controller, or whatever those functions are called today, can "manage" the search.

CAP airplanes can search their quadrants, without any interference from non-CAP pilots. Local volunteers can search their quadrants, again not having to worry about swapping paint with the CAP. With the modern GPS applications and an iPad, search areas can be easily identified and airplanes kept separate. The most basic radio call signs and protocols can be set up. Not brain surgery.

I completely agree. With most of theses incidents, time is of the essence if there is any chance of survival. If we were talking a 5 square mile search area there might be an argument for less eyes in the air but most cover a much larger grid if they even have the slightest clue as where to look. When peoples lives are at stake there shouldn't be some bureaucratic turf war.
I have a friend who is on CAP and he's a heck of a nice guy but he only flies about once a month. I fly every week and most weeks I fly several days. Many of the guys that fly around here are the same way. We know the area much better than most of the CAP guys. No offense meant but if one of my loved ones was missing I would call a bunch of the locals first.

Mark,

Let me add my condolences. A lot of my flying, with or without passengers, is done without a particular destination in mind, I like to just go exploring. Filing a flight plan would be both impractical and impossible. Aviation does not need more legislation, it needs more education. I didn't know PLB's existed until watching an episode of "Flying Wild Alaska". I now fly with a PLB on board, although I have to admit I don't "educate" my passengers on its location or use. Thanks to this discussion I will change that.

In that same episode of FWA they said that PLBs were available for free (in Alaska I assumed), and yet two persons struck out on their snowmobiles without one. If this were true one would hope their decission was based on a lack of education. Having said that, we all have our lapse of judgement moments, and that will never change.

I also carry an inReach on board, although I only use it on long trips. I found out about these through an AOPA email. My purchase decision was based on business needs, not safety. I wanted my office to be able to reach me for emergencies (theirs, not mine) when I was on long flights so I'd know I needed to land ASAP to call them. I've just recently configured it, and handed out web addresses, so my family and key business persons know exactly where I am at all times.

I'd be willing to bet that out of the 150+ pilots that call our airport home only a few of them have ever heard of a PLB or inReach. I'm equally sure fewer have them and fewer use them.

Both of these devices, when used, would be far superior to a VFR flight plan for the purpose of locating a downed aircraft. The completion of the trifecta would be a 406 ELT. I'll be honest and say I don't have one. Why? Because I have three airplanes and they are expensive. I do adhere to the law (legislation) and keep the batteries in my 121.5 ELTs current, even though they are no longer monitored.

Perhaps a good way to educate pilots would be through the free market. The makers of PLBs, SPOT, inReach and others could easily produce online videos educating us in the importance of these technologies, and offer a discount code towards the purchase of a device at the conclusion of the video. AOPA would be an excellent organization to spearhead something like this, or perhaps a vendor such as Sporty's or Aircraft Spruce. Those of us that use these devices could show the video at one of our hangar parties.

Education please, not Legislation.

Lets please not turn this into a cap no cap thread! Mark, I'm sure , could not care less out opinions on that topic. And yes I have strong feelings towards that as well. We can start yet another cap bashing thread. I'm all for it

Mark. Yet another deepest condolences to you and your family. I have an 8 yr old daughter and know its not conceivable what you are going through. My prayers to you for strength and healing. I'm not as eloquent a writer as many on here but ill try and give a few cents worth towards your focus. I agree alot with rob. It's a strong human nature to want and justify, or bring some value to the situation. I would be in the same boat. I only ask of you to please keep an open minded approach to this. Which I highly commend you for doing so far with this inquiry!!!! Most people would be looking for any lawsuit or any new law to be put in place immediately to feel better and have a false sense of security about making things "safer". That is a growing majority outlook and we false sense inundated. Thank you for trying to educate yourself in our world of crazy abbreviations, acronyms, and just all around means of operating. We are HEAVIlY misunderstood and misconstrued by the media and people that do not understand the workings of what we do. Unfortunately in most cases of government involvement, it does not do much good for what it is intended. I think your same efforts focused towards non government enforced action would prove you a much higher rate of return if your main focus is saving lives. You would probably have an open invitation to speak at events of many kinds. If you were to get with some organizations and severely knowledgeable people on this topic, your testimony would be more powerful than wildfire. YOU could single handidly save countless lives. I have not seen the government do anything more effectively or proficiently than Americans can do on their own with a good game plan and motivation. You have the strongest of the latter. So as someone eluded to. Some of these ideas would not save lives anymore than you calling the cops everytime you needed to run to the grocery store. It won't make you a better driver. It won't keep you fron taking a different route to stop for gas, or rent a movie. And it won't keep you from just flat screwin up. Nothing the government can do to stop bad decisions. You can make a difference tho. You already have! Thank you and again my deepest sincerest condolences. Not just saying that. God bless Mark. And please ask follow up questions. Anything at all. Don't be afraid to throw it out there. Betting you'll get more ideas and help here and this way than any other!!

Also wanted to quickly add that there's way more peoe here that sincerely care about you and your cause than some politician acting as if he cares and using your story to attach some bill to he's been trying to get pushed through. You want help?? You came to the right place! Thanks.

I am so sorry for your loss. I have two boys and I can't imagine myself in your shoes. My prayers are with you.

As to the use of flight plans, I have been flying 30 yrs and have filled very very few. I love the freedom of flight and the ability to just jump over and take a look at what ever. I love that about the way we enjoy our skies and our great country. I can't imagine having to file a plan and follow it to the letter. Yes I would still be flying, but at what expense of the pleasure I derive from my love of being able to explore on a whim and add an hour to any flight and go sight seeing. I do have a SPOT that I use to track my progress, just in case. I would never want to opt for having to file a flight plan, it's not the way I want to fly. However if the use of better equipment was available as a reasonable cost, I wouldn't be against better ELT type equipment.

Again I am sorry for your loss

rw2 wrote:

Cary wrote:Before this “official” limiting mentality came into being, I participated in a number of searches, volunteering my time and airplane for the local Sheriff’s office when I lived in Laramie. With a couple of deputies aboard, we successfully located at least 2 victims that I can recall, even before the CAP could get their airplanes into the area.

This post is on behalf of a CAP friend who can't post himself due to new user registration being shutoff in anticipation of BCP 3.0.314159265. All of the comments below are his:

To the gentleman who put a couple of deputies in his plane and found two victims:
1) Congratulations.
2) Damn risky thing to do if you're not trained in Search and Rescue.
3) It's that everyone flocking to the area in airplanes and bumping into each other phenomenon is exactly why TFRs are set up and SAR is called in.
4) What if that pilot had gone down too? The liability implications are staggering.
5) Do people not realize that CAP pilots ARE local pilots who know the area?
6) Yes, CAP has its limitations and hoops to jump through.
7) Most pilots, even experienced ones, don't know how to do SAR. That's just to emphasize the point that if you don't know what you're doing, try to help out the ones who do.
If you know the area, can conduct Search and Rescue, and a good pilot. Why are you not in the CAP helping to enhance its SAR capability? We cld certainly use the experience and help!

Yup, CAP has its share of pilots who seem to think we're flying F-16s or something, but for the most part....We're just safer pilots who jump through a lot of hoops and dedicate a lot of time, money, and effort to do what we do.

When I was a kid we would burn our fields and ditches to clean them for spring. One year we decided to burn a extra thick section that sent up a lot of smoke. My dad and us kids where keeping it contained with shovels and watching it burn when the local volunteer fire department arrived in their brand new shiny truck. They came roaring across the field strait into the a swampy section and sank right up to their axles.

We finished putting out the fire while they span their wheels and made big ruts, then Dad went and got the tractor and pulled
them out.

I was only about 12 and as I looked at the big ruts we would have to fix i asked my Dad why they had done that.
I still remember he just shook his head and said " Most of the guys I've known that volunteer just want to put lights on their pickups, drive fast and tell people their firemen..... but their not the kinda guys that get much done"

Blu wrote: Most of the guys I've known that volunteer just want to put lights on their pickups, drive fast and tell people their firemen..... but their not the kinda guys that get much done"

I think that says it all....

At least half of the time I go flying I have no idea where I am going to go. Kind of makes it hard to file a plan. Most of these flights cover 300 miles or more. I do have a SPOT. I cannot think of anything more boring than direct to another airport. I like to explore the country. This is even more the case when I take people for a ride. I feel compelled to show them all kinds of interesting things which most certainly wont be a straight line flight. Flight plans dont save people but emergency locator beacons and being prepared do. Flew 1000 miles in my 170 to Oshkosh and when I took off all I knew was I was going east. With the winds and weather why make a plan it is only going to change in a small plane.

I don't want to bash the CAP. But I'll tell you, that I have volunteered for mountain search and rescue operations, which were highly technical in nature: high angle recoveries, short hauling from choppers, grid searches, avalanches, air scent working dogs... and many hours slogging in the bush training and working with dedicated people who give of their time to be ready when needed. The notion that the pseudo-military approach and beurocracy is necessary is completely false. Many more pilots would join, get trained and be ready - but will not put up with any BS. The training needed for a pilot is nowhere near what is needed for civilian volunteer mountain sar. Ever gotten involved in the search dog crowd? Talk about training and coordination.