If this thread is to just become a pilot whinge-fest, an opportunity will be
lost. Could I suggest that before posting that "we don't like bow decks" etc,
some thought is put into exactly why, what the real risks are, rather than just
that they make us feel uncomfortable.
So, just because a pilot doesn't want to compile half a page of explanation as to why they feel something is dangerous, and instead they just state the particular item, this turns it into a "whinge-fest". Considering we are on a pilots forum, speaking on a thread that will be predominantly be read by Nth Sea pilots, ALL of whom understand and appreciate the flight manoeuvre mentioned, and ALL of whom appreciate the un-necessary risks involved (considering that the deck could have been programmed for a day landing), you feel that it needs to be dissected in order to make it a legitimate concern.....
Well, why don't we start then shall we, anyone one else feel free to chime in please:
Shall we start by the fact that night approaches are to be conducted from a stable approach gate, standardised by a visual sight picture. As we no longer have a heave limit, as long as the heave rate is acceptable, the deck could be moving by say 10m (not unheard of), so where do we get our standard sight picture on a deck that is moving 30ft. Disorientation and black hole effect are serious risks here.
Did I really need to break that down? I suspect not.
HC, stop belittling fellow pilots suggestions, if this needs to become a "whinge-fest" in order to get the points out in the open, then that at least it might get us talking, as long as we have your response to any suggestions, it will only encourage pilots to stay silent. Why do you think it's taking so long for this thread to gain momentum?