| by |
Joseph E. (Jeb) Burnside and Doug Ritter |
 |
|
|
| About Doug Ritter ... |
|
Doug Ritter is former
News Editor of AVweb and now contributes on special projects. An experienced
and respected aviation journalist, Doug is a contributing editor to
The
Aviation Consumer and
Aviation
Safety and a former contributing editor to Flight Training. He also writes
for CODE ONE and AOPA Pilot, as well as other aviation publications.
Doug is
best known for his insightful product evaluation and comparison articles, his
interpretation and explanation of complex technical and engineering concerns
related to aircraft systems and products, and his in-depth investigation of
aviation products, flight safety, and human factors issues. He is a leading
expert in the area of aviation survival and a working member of the SAE
Aerospace Council S-9 Cabin Safety Provisions Committee and S9-GA General
Aviation Sub-Committee.
Doug is also the publisher and editor of Equipped
to Survive, a web site devoted to survival equipment and techniques.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recent reporting by AVweb and other aviation
publications illuminating the Civil Air Patrol's (CAP) participation
in Operation Drop-In and related anti-drug efforts by the federal
government has highlighted a fundamental shift from the CAP's
traditional primary mission, search and rescue. No longer is
the organization's central focus on its role as the auxiliary
to the U.S. Air Force but, increasingly, it is on new activities
that have nothing to do with looking for missing aircraft and
persons or its cadet programs. Those activities involve serving
in a support role — a force multiplier, if you will — for the
federal government's controversial drug interdiction efforts,
as well as other federal law enforcement activities.
In fact, Operation Drop-In is just the latest, formal
program involving the CAP and the nation's chief anti-drug agencies,
the U.S. Customs Service and the Drug Enforcement Agency. For
years, the CAP has been engaged in flight operations on behalf
of the federal government, flying federal law enforcement personnel
and their equipment to search for clandestine airstrips and marijuana
fields and flying the borders looking for smugglers, for example.
Of course, as the CAP's drug-interdiction activities have grown
in scope and frequency, so have its budget and its appetite for
an ever-greater role to play. You could say that CAP is, itself,
addicted to drugs.
What's All The Fuss?
As word of the CAP's involvement in Operation Drop-In
has spread, so has grass roots opposition to this role, leading
to a major and growing public relations problem for the organization.
Of course, CAP has always had something of a public relations
problem among many pilots. Much of this problem stems from the
long-held perception among CAP members that being a member and
wearing a uniform confers upon them some special authority. Manifestations
of such attitudes tend to rub the general pilot population the
wrong way. In particular, many in CAP tend to emphasize the
military aspects of the organization, the uniforms, rank, decorations
and regulations, turning off many pilots who see this enthusiasm
for such trappings as misplaced and an insult to those who have
served in the military, despite the fact that many in CAP are
former military members. Some call this the "tin soldier"
syndrome, itself a reason many decide not to join, or quickly
drop out of CAP.
Non-members are sometimes envious of what they view
as the CAP member's perks: free or reduced-cost flying time in
equipment that often compares quite favorably to what is available
at the local FBO. They probably don't know that members joke
that CAP means "Come And Pay" for the myriad of expenses
generally shouldered by those who are active members.
Animosity toward CAP can arise from many places.
From the FBO who sees only the low-cost flying offered by CAP
as a threat to his business. To the former member who cared not
for the chain of command or who had a bad cadet experience, and
to the fly-in visitor who has had a run-in with a poorly-trained
CAP cadet providing directions to a parking spot.
Whatever the rationale, whatever the reason, the
CAP's perception among average GA pilots is decidedly mixed.
Over the years that perception has generally tended to get worse,
not better, and CAP has generally done little to help matters.
While most pilots generally agree that the CAP serves a useful
function through its youth, aerospace education and SAR programs
— especially its SAR programs — that understanding often dissolves
into vehement opposition when Operation Drop-In is discussed.
Reaction to this program and CAP's involvement has been far louder
and more pronounced than the generally benign reaction to prior
CAP efforts in government drug interdiction efforts which were
focused solely on violators of the law with little or no interaction
or involvement of the general pilot population at large.
Simply put, GA pilots go ballistic when they learn
that the CAP is "spying" on them or their airplane.
Despite the uniforms and military trappings, CAP is still viewed
as civilian in nature and certainly not as law enforcement personnel.
Pilots are an independent breed. If they weren't before they
started flying, they became more independent after their newfound
ability to pretty much go when and where they want became habit.
The knowledge that Uncle Sugar is poking around airport ramps,
jotting down notes on N-numbers and serial numbers, is viewed
as yet another inch of the camel's nose under the tent leading
to eradication of "general aviation as we know it."
The CAP, as the organization implementing the government's anti-drug
policy, comes in for the brunt of the criticism. Little opposition
was heard when it was the National Guard carrying out the policy,
though after being sensitized to the efforts by the CAP operation,
that itself might change.
What are the CAP's anti-drug activities? How does
Operation Drop-In mesh with the federal government's other antidrug
activities? Most importantly, how did CAP's involvement in Operation
Drop-In come about, how important is this involvement to the organization's
future and what will that future include? Read on.
A Brief History of the CAP
Although its history dates from World War II, Congress
"officially" created the Civil Air Patrol in 1946 to
serve three primary missions: aerospace education, cadet programs
and emergency services. Subsequently, in 1948, Congress designated
the CAP as the official auxiliary of the U.S. Air Force, shortly
after the service itself was separated from the U.S. Army. These
two congressional acts have their roots in the coastal patrol
and submarine spotting efforts begun by volunteer general aviation
pilots during World War II. After the war, rather than disband
the CAP and give up the national asset it had become, Congress
opted to formalize the organization and make it answerable to
the Air Force.
In 1985, Congress' infinite wisdom lent itself to
expanding the CAP's role, by adding support of law enforcement
to the organization's missions. Interestingly, nowhere in any
of its promotional literature, including that used to solicit
new members, is mention made of this fourth mission. The following
year, 1986, Congress put money where its mouth was by allocating
some $7 million of that year's military appropriation to acquire
"major items of equipment" need by CAP to accomplish
its counter-drug reconnaissance mission. Since then, more and
more federal agencies — including the FAA — have been enlisted
to help the federal government wage its war against drugs.
Enter The FAA
Skip to 1997. At that time, the FAA was developing
its latest contribution to the federal government's antidrug effort
— at least part of which has basically become Operation Drop-In
— and learned of the CAP's role in supporting the DEA and the
Customs Service. Run by the FAA's Office of Civil Aviation Security
(ACS), the agency was seeking some way of enhancing its own mission,
that of protecting "the users of commercial air transportation
against terrorist and other criminal acts."
The ACS was developing a new counterdrug initiative
and, through contacts in federal law enforcement, learned of the
CAP's assistance to the U.S. Customs Service. One thing led to
another and a Memorandum of Understanding was entered into between
the FAA, the USAF and the CAP on May 15, 1997. Less than a month
later, on June 8, 1997, AVweb first reported on Operation
Drop-In. This MOU forms the underpinnings of Operation Drop-In,
apparently flowing from ACS's Drug Investigations Support Program
(DISP). According to the ACS's
web site,
this program is designed to assist "Federal, state, and local
law enforcement agencies with airborne drug interdiction,"
among other objectives. Apparently, those objectives include
the euphemistically termed "surveys" of general aviation
airports and the logging of N-numbers, aircraft data plates, etc.
So, Just What Is Operation Drop-In?
Good question. According to a "point paper"
prepared by the CAP, Operation Drop-In involves conducting these
surveys at GA airports "as directed by the FAA to assist
in the identification of aircraft used in drug trafficking."
The point paper goes on to note that "information collected
by CAP volunteers on the surveys include the registration number
and data plate information, as well as characteristics common
to aircraft used in drug trafficking." The information,
once collected, is then forwarded to the FAA, presumably the ASC.
What the ASC does with it something of a mystery, but AVweb
is reliably told that the agency compares the data from Operation
Drop-In with its own data. Presumably, this means the aircraft
registrations database. The agency then culls "most"
of that information and ships the remainder to a clearinghouse
operation created by the federal government to manage counter-drug activities. Many remain suspicious that the information
not appropriate for investigation is, in fact, disposed of, remembering
too many instances of drug enforcement agencies playing fast and
loose with rules and civil law and intent.
All of which raises several more questions. AVweb
has submitted to CAP HQ at Maxwell AFB several detailed questions
regarding Operation Drop-In. Among the information we've sought
is some idea of the use to which the FAA puts this data, the training
and specific parameters used by CAP members participating in Operation
Drop-In and the program's financial impact on the organization.
We also asked for information on national participation in the
program and whether any altercations have erupted. To date, however,
we have yet to receive a response to our inquiries. As a result,
we can't tell our readers what the historical results of Operation
Drop-In have been.
We can't tell you what special training or equipment
CAP units receive involving Operation Drop-In. We also can't
tell you what kind of financial impact Operation Drop-In has had
on the CAP, nor can we tell you the degree to which CAP units
nationwide are participating in the program. This is a shame
— and a disservice to rank and file CAP members — because the
phenomenal interest in Operation Drop-In among general aviation
pilots is growing daily. By addressing these questions and helping
GA better understand the program, the CAP might possibly help
to ward off criticism and tell its side of the story concerning
the value of Operation Drop-In. As it is, however, the CAP's
relative silence cannot but harm the organization.
What We Do Know
On the other hand, we do get lots of messages and
reports from the field. Reports of entire CAP wings (what CAP
calls the individual state organizations that make up CAP nationwide)
opting out of the program, California and Ohio being two examples,
according to our sources. Reports of many local squadrons declining
to participate. Reports of long-time members deciding enough
is enough and opting to leave the CAP. As we say, we tried to
get a list from CAP, but they have so far declined to provide
one. It appears that even within CAP, support for this program
is mixed, with many members vehemently opposed to CAP's participation.
This in spite of the fact that as a purely volunteer organization,
nobody in CAP is obligated to participate if they don't want to.
We have also received disturbing reports such as
the one from a CAP member who attended training given to Operation
Drop-In participants where he says they were told, reading directly
from official
CAP documents, that if ever confronted at an airport while conducting
a mission, to say that they are on a "flight training mission."
In addition, they were told, if they don't see any "suspicious"
aircraft,to just write down random N-numbers of whatever aircraft
they do see and turn them in, clearly an action without the slightest
probable cause.
With CAP unwilling to provide any answers to our
queries, AVweb is left to provide its own answers to many
of these questions based on previously issued official information.
One of them is what characteristics are common to aircraft use
in drug trafficking? Think about it. Look for obvious signs
of off-airport operation: dirt and mud, gravel dings, grass stains,
etc. Just the kind of "evidence" exhibited by aircraft
operating at the hundreds of perfectly legitimate grass and dirt
airstrips around the country. Look also for signs of additional
fuel capacity, like auxiliary tanks in the cabin. Like someone
would use for an over-water ferry flight. "Stripped-down"
aircraft, with otherwise normal equipment (seats, radios, etc.)
removed to increase its useful load. Similar to what most parachute
schools and organizations do with their jump planes. So far, no
revelations here — just basic common sense and things the general
aviation community has been aware of for years. And, things which
have logical explanations and purposes for the most part.
Blacked out cabin windows, a tarp covering bulky
cargo and/or loose "plant matter" in the cabin are also
signs. Just the sort of thing pilots do to protect their interiors,
especially in sunny climes near the southern border, and to protect
valuable equipment from prying eyes and temptation. But, perhaps
the most basic of information uncovered by Operation Drop-In is
whether a displayed N-number matches the FAA's registration records
when compared with the aircraft data plate. Seemingly, anyone
can paint on their aircraft any N-number they want, with or without
registering it with the FAA. Doing so, of course, is a clear
violation of the FARs and is a red flag to anyone with a suspicious
mind. Which basically means that such an option is not a good
one for a drug smuggler. In fact, any airplane exhibiting such
characteristics would raise eyebrows on any airport ramp or in
any maintenance shop around the country.
Which highlights the basic flaw with and the fundamental
source of opposition to Operation Drop-In among general aviation
pilots: the kind of "evidence" being sought through
the program is so obviously blatant, so apparent to a casual observer,
that anyone engaged in drug smuggling would carefully avoid flying
into any public airport with an airplane exhibiting these characteristics.
As a result, Operation Drop-In and similar programs can only
be viewed as focusing on otherwise law-abiding pilots and aircraft
owners. Despite the fact that the aircraft being "surveyed"
are parked in the open for anyone to see (a basic rule of Operation
Drop-In specifies that no hangars are to be entered) the very
idea that they are under suspicion by the federal government —
and by the CAP, comprised as it is of fellow pilots — sends pilots
and aircraft owners into orbit.
Many who seem to have difficulty understanding opposition
to Operation Drop-In have compared it to neighborhood watch programs
designed to prevent crime. The salient difference is that such
neighborhood watch programs involve all the law abiding citizens
of the block and deal only with situations where there is reasonable
suspicion that something illegal is going on. These programs
don't generally report law abiding activities or subject innocent
citizens to some sort of review by a clandestine government operation
based on criteria that is unknown, nor do the results end up in
some national database.
In AVweb's view, the premise of Operation
Drop-In — that drug smugglers use public airports with aircraft
obviously used for such purposes — is so flawed that the program
can only be viewed as a further intrusion into the privacy of
general aviation pilots and aircraft owners. The CAP's involvement
— aiding and abetting this invasion of privacy — is viewed as
a blatant betrayal from within the "brotherhood" of
aviation. Through its participation in Operation Drop-In, the
Civil Air Patrol, as an institution, is being irreversibly harmed.
As a result of Operation Drop-In, AVweb has
seen the reaction among non-CAP pilots to their brethren in blue
degenerate from feelings of benign neglect and simple dislike
to unconcealed hostility. AVweb has watched the CAP's
involvement with Operation Drop-In generate a growing backlash
against the organization among pilots. Combine that backlash
with the CAP's failure to either anticipate adverse reactions
among its core constituency of general aviation pilots, or even
among its own membership, or to proactively explain its role —
including helping AVweb understand that role — and one
begins to understand what the increasingly loud shouting within
the GA community is all about.
We question how anyone is supposed to trust an organization
that is telling its members to, if not tell an outright lie, at
very best to stretch the truth to damn near breaking. What are
other pilots supposed to think of CAP members willing to go along
with such conduct in direct contradiction of the CAP standards
of general conduct and ethics? What sort of message does that
send to the cadets for whom seniors are supposed to set an example?
As this article was being prepared, CAP HQ informed
AVweb that the organization's participation in Operation
Drop-In was being "carefully considered." AVweb
was told that Operation Drop-In was the subject of communications
among the CAP's National Executive Committee — with the clear
implication that Operation Drop-In was being reevaluated — and
that a statement would be forthcoming from the National Commander
no later than Friday, July 10. Unfortunately, that deadline came
and went without any such statement.
For the Civil Air Patrol's sake, AVweb hopes
that Operation Drop-In will, itself, be dropped by the organization
and that the CAP will use the resources available to re-focus
itself on its three core missions. Anything less will only serve
to further remove the CAP from its general aviation roots and
further alienate it from its core constituency. For the sake
of the future of Civil Air Patrol, CAP must "just say
no!"
A Valuable Organization
Without a doubt, Civil Air Patrol has a significant
role to play in general aviation. The CAP's three main programs
— Aerospace Education, Youth Development and Search and Rescue
— have served both the organization and general aviation quite
well during the 50-plus years of CAP's formal existence. In fact,
many CAP cadets go on to successful military careers or into commercial
aviation. The programs also serve to get teenagers off the street,
provide them with (most of the time) excellent role models, valuable
social development and interaction with their peers, plus instill
in them the concepts of teamwork, achievement and leadership.
Of course, no discussion of the CAP's contributions
would be complete without a deep bow to its Search and Rescue
mission. Time and again, CAP volunteers have donated their valuable
time, resources and — tragically — given their lives in attempting
to locate downed aircraft and missing persons, to name but a very
short list of typical SAR missions. CAP has also always been
there in times of natural disaster, assisting with trained emergency
service volunteers in addition to air operations.
Following are a few comments AVweb has received
and public posts that have been made that highlight the constructive,
worthwhile support CAP provides to general aviation.
-
"I had an older brother and a younger sister
who took full advantage of the cadet and senior programs and certainly
learned a lot from it. The exchange program and summer encampments
are experiences that I can remember hearing about and wishing
I were a part of. There was also a Ranger program that taught
survival skills and it was certainly a huge status symbol to wear
the orange ball cap of a Ranger because you had to earn it. We
had a very vibrant and enthusiastic cadet squadron of around 40
members in our area...and it thrived on the enthusiasm of the
senior leaders who really were interested in developing solid
citizens."
-
"I joined the CAP Cadet program in about
1965, at the age of about fifteen. I had always had a strong
interest in aviation, and wanted to be a fighter pilot. My experiences
are not typical of all cadets, however, for three reasons: I was
in a better squadron than most, I stayed longer than most cadets
do, and I advanced farther and was involved in more programs than
most cadets. Nevertheless, my experiences show what CAP is capable
of."
-
"In light of how Civil Air Patrol is being
consistently raked over the coals by most of the aviation community,
I would like to forward this press release of a search mission
that occurred last weekend resulting in four lives being saved
in Oregon. Despite the public impression of Operation Drop-In,
a VERY small part of our total mission, all members of CAP are
still dedicated to doing what we do best, SAVING LIVES. If people
would simply step back and look at the big picture of CAP, rather
than fixating on Drop-In, they might realize that we still work
very hard as volunteers, giving our time and money without any
compensation, so that others may live."
-
We're having a nice time right now with a CAP
squadron encampment at our gliderport. They GI-clean the place,
help handle ships, feed the cat.... It all depends on leadership.
The guy in charge has to have a firm grip on the testosterone
valve. PS: This group's CO looked over our video collection,
pulled out "Top Gun", and said, "Lock this up."
CAP is hardly perfect and it has its share of warts,
as do all organizations, especially those run by and for volunteers.
No need to dwell on that here. Participating in CAP activities
is not inexpensive and members often must reach deep to participate.
While the flying activities of CAP are the most visible, in most
squadrons, non-pilots are the majority and whether in support
roles or as ground team members, these individuals are essential
to the fulfillment of CAP's many missions.
In balance, the work
CAP does is of a positive nature, supports the betterment of general
aviation and, by and large, is well received, if not always appreciated.
CAP members spend countless hours at often thankless tasks to
help make aviation safer and the world a better place.
For more information on the Civil Air Patrol or to find a CAP squadron near you, visit the
CAP web site.
The authors of this article both have a longstanding
relationship with the Civil Air Patrol.
As a cadet member of
a composite squadron (senior and cadet members) in the early
1970s, one contributor accomplished his primary training, using
the squadron's Cessna 150 and Piper Cherokee 140 at a very low
hourly rate. Once he received his Private ticket, he went on
to fly several actual SAR missions for that squadron and regularly
patrolled the local Interstate highway on holiday weekends in
search of obvious traffic problems. Later, after moving away
from his hometown, he joined another squadron, rising to become
a CAP Captain and mission pilot. Again, he flew several actual
missions, plus countless practice sorties.
The other contributor got actively involved in CAP
a few years ago because of his interest in SAR, after years of
supporting CAP in various capacities. He has been recognized
by the Wing commander for his unique contributions and flown on
several missions, working towards mission pilot status. He wears
a casual uniform or Nomex flight suit only when flying, as required
by regulation, but is otherwise not inclined to be involved in
the military aspects of CAP and has declined any promotion in
rank for the same reason.
|
An Uneasy Feeling
Here at AVweb we have received a lot
of feedback regarding our coverage of the CAP's Operation Drop-In.
In round numbers, reader opinion is running 3 to 1 in opposition
to the program. Perhaps more instructive, however, are the observations,
first-hand accounts and information we have received from many
readers. They have been de-identified where requested and names
have been withheld. Below, we have included a handful of them,
edited for space and punctuation, that are representative of the
comments we have received.
-
"Part of the 'procedure' for CAP members
was disclosed to me last night at a CAP meeting. It was read directly
from a briefing and instruction pamphlet issued to CAP members
engaged in Operation Drop-In. It calls for CAP members to go to
an airport and record tail numbers of 'suspicious aircraft.' But
(and here's the rub!), if there are no 'suspicious' aircraft to
be seen, then they are instructed to record tail numbers of 'random'
aircraft, and submit them to the Feds! If confronted during this
activity, CAP members are instructed to state that they are on
a 'flight training mission.' How's that for being up-front with
General Aviation?"
-
"CAP has never been, and should not be,
in the law enforcement business. Even the CAP's sponsoring agency,
the U.S. Air Force, is prohibited by law from participating in
law enforcement. CAP should give this mission back to the DEA,
Customs Service, the National Guard (which are state militias
legally authorized to perform such functions), and the other federal,
state, and local law enforcement agencies to whom it rightly belongs."
-
"I found it quite disturbing that the New
CAP (Civil Air Patrol) volunteers are getting underway to start
doing drug enforcement... at our local fields. The program titled
"Operation Drop-In" smacks of the nazi era.... The
directive has them flying in unannounced to public owned airports
and surveying every aircraft on the ramp. Looking for dirty airplanes
with dirty undercarriages, rock hits...sanded propellers.... but
are a few of the reasons to report the aircraft.... Reporting
the N number, S/N, location and time of any aircraft THEY DEEM
suspicious to the intelligence group they'll work for located
in El Paso,TX."
-
"As a pilot and member of the Civil Air
Patrol I welcome your inquires and exposition of the CAP Drop-In
program. I am very suspicious of the direction in which any program
of this type can lead an organization like the Civil Air Patrol.
I am afraid in its search for funds CAP is too ready to participate
in programs of which it ought be very careful. Civil Air Patrol
is very well intentioned and respected and I am proud to be a
member. I would not like to see a program such as the Drop-In
program ruin or bring into disrepute CAP's operations."
-
"A week or two ago I was giving our little
club's C-150G a much-needed bath. As I was washing off the only
part of the plane with dirt (other than a little "hangar
dust" on the upper surfaces), the underside, little did I
realize that *had* someone from CAP's "Drop In" program
dropped in on our little airport, I just *might* have been viewed
with suspicion. Well, I was fortunate, because no one dropped
in or drove in or anything. Bottom line is that the CAP ought
to stick to the reasons that we have it in the first place: mainly
search and rescue, introduction of flying to our youth, and education
of same. Period!!!"
-
"Caught with genuine interest your note
on the CAP 'drop-in' program. Odds are someone is going to loose
some teeth over this. Reaction here in AZ on the ground has been
mild curiousity to totally pissed. Local commander is very sensitive
to the cooperation and respect of FBOs in carrying out CAP missions
and the matter is being discussed at Wing level. Most CAP pilots
feel it's not our affair — and very bad PR. (We've also had
our funds cut to 'gas-and-oil' by the FAA. Gee, I thought we
were an aux. of the Air Force. FAA's moving into the military,
too."
-
"I am familiar with this program but did
not directly participate. Also, I stopped my limited association
and membership with the CAP mainly because of the 'New'
attitude that some of the local senior members adopted ('copped')
when they became involved in these 'clandestine' DEA
flights. Don't cry for the Civil Air Patrol, Inc. Cry for what
it is about to do to aviation."
-
"Ya know, every time a government gets behind
and can no longer enforce all of its own coercion, they enlist
the aid of some well-meaning yoyos who are more than willing to
throw their weight around — albeit improperly, ignorantly, and
dangerously. One of the first signs of a failing government is
its willingness to get its citizens to spy on each other. CAP
is one such bunch of unwitting accomplices to the guvments coercive
mechanism. They need not be competent. The guvment is not interested
in competence. It is interested in compliance."
|
Email this article
