View Full Version : Price of new Russian nvg


nigelh
13th Jan 2007, 22:36
Have been offered some nvg from Russia 3rd generation ones . The ones with 250m range are $3,500 and the better 450m ones are $7,500. Does anybody know if this sounds correct ? I intend to get them on trial before i buy them. Does anyone have any new Russian nvg,s and can comment on their quality ?



Helicopspeeder
14th Jan 2007, 06:02
Hello,
Sounds a bit steep, I'm no expert but try opticsplanet.net, probably get them for half the price you are looking at.
Good luck,
BC

nigelh
14th Jan 2007, 11:21
none seem to be aimed at aviation ....what special requirements are there for aviation ? Only intend to use them as a co pilot back up . Have any private operators any experience of flying with non military nvg ? Thanks for help.

stas-fan
14th Jan 2007, 19:50
I hope you only want them for night gardening or whale watching.

Please tell me you do not want them for anything related to flying!

If you have a helicopter capable of night flight, which wasn't a cheap investment, you take your life seriously, then spend the correct amount on a product that works. You wouldn't buy a 100 flying helemet or 20 artificial horizon... I hope.

The danger of using half capable peices of equipment like those is the false sense of security you can be lulled into.

nigelh
14th Jan 2007, 22:57
slightly predictable pprune type of condescending answer ...Thanks !!
This is for co pilot use which can only add to safety. By the way i know of a lot of military pilots who did hundreds of hours nvg,s without very expensive compatable cockpits ,by putting tape and plastic screens over the lights. I imagine there will be civil pilots using nvg,s for private flying but maybe they want to keep quiet about it !! ( if so you can always pm me)

stas-fan
14th Jan 2007, 23:14
Predictable answer? That's because the P in Prune is for professional, and most readers are just that.

I didn't mention cockpit conversions at all, they are not always necessary for the use you describe.

The worrying point is you think your co-pilot acting as your lookout with toy NVGs makes you safer? I hope we don't get called out to peel you off the cliff face.

By all means have a second set of eyes, but if they are 75% blind and you don't understand that basic concept, you will think things are rosey, and then it's all over.

212man
14th Jan 2007, 23:22
NH,
You might like to re-read and check for BS factor there! Sounds like beer induced bravado by the story teller, if you have in fact been told that, or just plain BS from a Walter Mitty. Not sure that too many Mil pilots spend their time flying helicopters privately either.

tacr2man
15th Jan 2007, 14:55
You might want to look at this 260074563827http://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/globalAssets/rtCurve.gifhttp://pics.ebaystatic.com/aw/pics/s.gif
on ebay uk

MSP Aviation
15th Jan 2007, 15:32
there was an article within the last year or so in Aerial Law Enforcement Assosciation Magazine about the use/evolution of nvgs, and when nvgs were first used in military flight, the cockpit lighting was modified/jury-rigged in a similar manner as described by nigelh

Bravo73
15th Jan 2007, 15:39
Oh gawd, tacr2man. Don't encourage him... :uhoh:

Flying Bull
15th Jan 2007, 18:45
Hi nigelh,
I do about 1/3rd of my flying with nvg.
They are great for getting the job done - but all scary moments in the last years were while flying with nvgs....
Even with proper training, nvg in front of your eyes, you are easily going further than you should. (
There are dangers, which will surprise you without proper training.
Take a big chimney with lights in front of a city.
You having a little decent - going straight for the chimney - and you might misinterpret all the green lights as streetlights....
Take rain or snow - you won't see the drops - only recognize a reduced visibilty. Until with snow - you suddenly find yourself in a black hole.
Take a nice flat landing site - until you touch down and find out, that on grassites you might not see the slope until you switch on your landing light - which might blind your nvgs....
Proper training is required to know about all the dangers - and even with nvg, you should stick to the normal VFR-Night limits - or you should have a really good reason, to risk your own and your crews life i.e. saving another life.

Greetings Flying Bull

tacr2man
15th Jan 2007, 20:10
I wasnt promoting the usage only giving info for a cheaper and better alternative, what you want to risk is your own business:hmm:

Can anyone tell me the efficacy of flir for this type of usage? or is it only for a surveilance /search usage by an observer?

nigelh
15th Jan 2007, 21:00
Thankyou Flying Bull for your answer. My intention was to use it only as an extra pair of eyes in the cockpit. Surely it is safer if you have a co pilot passenger who can point out possible obstacles say on approach or departure ?? ie if he suddenly says " can you see the wires off to our left 300ft or "have you seen the one tall tree in the middle of our approach" that can only be to the better. I am not advocating flying on them and getting into trouble , just doing a normal flight but getting extra information. I am sure that some "expert" is now going to say that "extra" information is somehow dangerous. From all my talks with people with 1000,s Hrs nvg flying they almost all despair of the fact that in this country we have a distrust of them, even though they may well have saved many lives if used especially in the Police/ Emergency role.
ps i dont think that anywhere i said that i would buy "Toy" ones...i would just rather spend 5,000 rather than 15,000. Also i would do final and landing with lights etc................yes i know the nvg,s would then cease to be effective ...

stas-fan
16th Jan 2007, 23:41
Normally I'd let it pass but on this occasion......... forget NVG until you know what you are talking about. I think I'll start a thread asking if anyone knows where I can get a cheap A.I. so I can have a crack at instrument flying.

NVG still work when landing lights are on. Except for NVGs from Russia. They bloom out quickly as they do under other lighting.

Extra information is dangerous if you only get 60% of it and you think you have 100%.

police and others don't just despair at the mistrust, we hate it, but we wouldn't want people out there with crap gear, crashing in NVGs name and stopping the program completely.

5000 should get you a second hand gen 3 NVG, or 20 pairs of Russian ones.

sunnywa
17th Jan 2007, 00:26
Nigelh,

Unless your are going to do an accredited NVG flight course, and then use decent aviation goggles, you are setting yourself up for a prang. While the theory of having the co-jo looking out is nice, I'm sure that the AC would much rather have his CP being doing the job he is supposed to (iaw your company SOPs).

Do it properly or not at all. This one will bite.

MightyGem
18th Jan 2007, 08:29
What's with the 250/450m range? If you can't see for miles with them, then there is something wrong with them. :confused:

ShyTorque
18th Jan 2007, 15:40
Nigelh,

I have a fair amount of NVG time (and before that PNG, passive night goggles, when the use of night vision aids in the RAF was in its infancy). I was a military QHI / NVG instructor, and later a civilian NVG instructor (at a combined search and rescue and police special ops/ support role unit). I have seen totally non-compatible, "cobbled together" and correctly designed and fully compatible cockpit lightings.

In what role (i.e. what type of operation) do you propose using them? Are you normally operating single pilot or two pilot operations?

I have to say that I too have some misgivings about the concept of simply buying a set of previous generation NVGs, even for "only" the co-pilot's use, especially in a non-NVG compatible cockpit. The civilian unit SOPs I operated under forbade mixed NVG / non NVG crew operations in the way you describe.

nigelh
19th Jan 2007, 17:47
Shytorque thankyou for a "sensible" and "constructive" reply and all you say i take on board. Having said that half the fun of this site is to read the replies from people who have their heads up their *rses and have become in some way institutionalised. So thankyou to the people who jump to conclusions and say " ooooh your going to crash if you take those new fangled cheap toy things with no experience " Please ...NO MORE HELP !!
I am looking at using some excellent and reliable nvgs for private flights 2 pilot. One of the pilots has over 300 hrs nvg flying but not current. I still maintain that it HAS to be beneficial for one pilot to have the extra vision !?
ps a lot of nvgs have a range and do not let you see for miles.

ShyTorque
19th Jan 2007, 19:32
Nigelh,

Although it obviously seems very clear to you right now, there are quite a few "traps" in doing what you propose.

Firstly, your goggles may be seriously degraded by operating them in a non-nvg compatible cockpit. "White" panel lights cause a "bloom" effect, similar to switching on a landing lamp in hazy conditions, causing them to close down badly. You may well miss external details that they might otherwise "see" e.g. wires and whip aerials, tree branches etc.

Secondly, if you try to talk your handling pilot into doing something he cannot actually see, such as landing somewhere he might not otherwise do, you might well cause a handling accident. Firstly, he will be straining his eyes to see what you are talking to him about and the likelihood is that neither of you will be paying attention to the instruments (IAS, ROD, Tq..... get my drift)?

If he then switches on the searchlight, your goggles will instantly become useless. Your night vision will be poor as your eyes and his take a while to adjust and you remove the goggles from your eyeline..... etc.

NVG operators have (or should have) a well tried set of SOPs, outlining minimum light levels and minimum wx limits (NEVER use NVGs to try to extend night wx minima - this is potentially fatal). These SOPs outline crew responsibilities and procedures for goggle up, hover, transition and climb, cruise, descent and landing, manouevring close to obstructions and so forth. Also emergency procedures including goggle failure and inadvertent IMC.

You need to be extremely careful. Without serious thought, training and care, you are possibly about to embark on something very dangerous.

Do bear in mind that the sad side of aviation history is littered with the remains of pilots who thought: "Actually, I have a better idea" or "It can't happen to me". :hmm:

On the other hand, if you operate merely as a passenger and play no part in the actual operation of the aircraft, then I see no harm in it. Go ahead and play - but don't accidentally drop the goggles down amongst the yaw pedals. :ok:

stas-fan
19th Jan 2007, 21:20
if only a little misguided.........

I am the one you refer to in your

"replies from people who have their heads up their *rses and have become in some way institutionalised"

I am still here, 6000 Rotary hours later, 920 on NVG, mostly operational, lots of instructional NVG, 30 hours on Soviet "best quality" NVG in an MI-8 - Shat myself for 29 of those hours (1 hour was taxying) what would I know.

I bow to your expert knowledge on the subject.....

If you stick around the forum long enough someone will eventually support and may even assist you; then we can re-title it "Athiesm on PPrune."

crab@SAAvn.co.uk
20th Jan 2007, 06:29
NigelH, your comment about NVGs having a limited range shows your lack of knowledge. Do yourself a favour and have a look at what a set of goggles actually designed for aviation look like - guess what they don't have a limited range and some can be focussed from 10 feet to infinity.
Listen to what the experienced people on this thread have to say - many have survived the introduction of goggles into the military and are trying to save you from having to re-learn the lessons (many very scary ones).
Try driving along a country road in the dark with the head lights off and the passenger only on NVG - see how happy the driver is to continue when he can't see the road you are describing to him.

Thomas coupling
20th Jan 2007, 08:51
Sometimes I despair! Perhaps they should change PPL to PAL for private amateur pilot - which is what some aviators should be re-classified under. Obviously there are serious professionals out there in the PPL bracket but people like nigelH make me shudder!
Shytorque responded eloquently, please read and inwardly digest.
Night flying requires enough concentration without someobody telling you:
"can you see this, can you see that" when you know damn well you can't because you haven't goggles on???????:eek:
If you want to buy your passengers goggles, fill your boots, but tell them to shut the fook up when you are flying:ugh:
5000 wouldnt get you a hoffman box these days!

nigelh
20th Jan 2007, 19:33
Well ..it was only an idea !!:{ I shall only take mutes on board then.