I wrote to the head of CASA around 7? years ago with a well crafted and formal letter that I was assisted with by Dick Smith. The letter was in relation to NVFR forming part of the PPL syllabus and was in response to a higher than normal number of night-time crashes by un-rated PPL’s at the time, in crashes not dissimilar to this one. References were made to how CASA’s mandate is to follow the world’s best practice and how the USA include the NVFR with the PPL etc.
The official response was that the director was in caretaker mode and my request would be actioned as soon as the new head took over. Nothing but crickets since then despite two follow-up letters.
I later heard through unofficial channels that if they did try to do that, they would go out to the industry for consultation, which in this case would include half a dozen grumpy old CFI’s and that they would say it was unsafe etc, cost them money, etc etc and that it would never go ahead.
I have since noted / read that the USA has a disproportionately high number of NVFR accidents in comparison with Australia in terms of hours flown at night under the NVFR. I then wondered if in fact it was a good idea in the first place.
I did my Class 4 Instrument Rating (ie NVFR) (Yes, I am that old!) back in the 70's.
My test was conducted on a very smoking night with no visible horizon, essentially IFR, and ended with a partial panel leg, for real, after the vac pump failed about half way between Moree and Warwick for a landing with a kerosene flare path. I subsequently did quite a bit of NVFR in western Qld including a number of Longreach - Toowoomba trips. Also did a bit in NZ.
The key to safe and successful NVFR is:
- Be properly trained
- Be adequate experienced
- Be current
- Follow the rules
By the time I had completed my UPPL and Class 4 IR, I could fly around quite happily on instruments and even partial panel, and intercept and track the VOR and ADF (That probably saved my life on at least one occassion).
As I understand it, the requirements for instrument flight time for an UPPL, or whatever it is called these days, have been significantly reduced. Mind you, some still smacked in back then, but I suspect there was much more NVFR being conducted back then than there is today.