Night currency

[hole.digger]

Most likely a really dumb question, but...
How is a take- off and a landing defined?
Say I need my 3 night take offs and landings. Can I jump in a night equipped C150 or something like that and head to the nearest long runway to do 3 touch and gos in the length of the runway without the need for any expensive circuits?
And, how many landing fees would I be charged to do that?
Has anyone tried this? Obviously a bit dodgy, but with time and money a bit scarce all over, loopholes are every mans' (sorry, persons') best friend.

[tmpffisch]

A student that's learning to land shouldn't count bouncing down the runway as 5 touch and go's.....

[le Pingouin]

Remind me not to go flying with you.....

Seriously, wouldn't you have to doubt your competency (as in skill levels)? That's the whole point of currency isn't it?

You's a loooong time dead. Then again with a nick like that.....

[eocvictim]

what?

several things.
1) You want to fly a 150 at night?
2) You want to NAV a 150 at night???
3) You want to nav a 150 (at night) to an A/D with a strip long enough to do 3 touch and goes in the length of the stip to save money by avoiding doing 3 circuits?
4) Someone gave you a night rating?
5) Someone is letting you hire a 150?

How cheap are you? 3 (gulp) solo ccts in a 150 at MB might cost you what $100? If you're so cheap, it sounds like you wont be doing much flying anyway so why bother keeping the pax carrying recentcy?

There are "cheaper" ways of doing it but I feel you're better doing the 3 ccts :ok:

The only loopholes in aviation are nooses. Good Luck with that :ok:

[j3pipercub]

Before you all get high and mighty, I have had a CASA delegate suggest the same thing to me. It really isn't advisable however.

And what's wrong with a 150 at night EOC? Is it somehow less reliable than a 172 at night? Do the wings fail to produce lift outside the circuit? I have done about 15 hours in a 150 at night, naving around by myself.

Hole.digger, I understand that keeping your night currency can be difficult at times, however it probably would be a much better idea just to do the three circuits.

Cheers

j3

[megle2]

Our Casa FOI recently told us that we could not just taxi out at night and do the required take offs and landings.
He stated that we had to file a plan and go elsewhere and complete the task to achieve the recency.

Since he made the statement somebody has convinced him that he was wrong.

Of course you can do the recency in any aircraft type at a capital city with a full moon so you don't achieve much except the box is ticked.

Rather than bad mouth the original post what is the answer?

[bentleg]

Three circuits (two touch and goes and a full stop) meets the 90 day criteria to carry pax. Should be able to do that in less than a half hour. Bouncing down the runway does not include three approaches, an essential part of all good landings. Where I fly only full stops are counted as a landing - but check for your airfield.

The one hour at night IMHO requires a departure from the field returning with one hour VDO clocked up. I usually do three circuits as well to meet the pax requirement.

[PA39]

:ugh: Another of my famous quotes " i could teach a monkey to fly, but i could never teach it common sense". Why the F#*k would you want to do 3 t/o and landings in that manner?? beats me, who do we blame for that mind set, the "pilot" or "Instructor"? and i use both terms loosely.

[Howard Hughes]

3 circuits about 18 mins, you could probably cut it to 9 or 10 in a decent twin! Surely that is a small price to pay...:ok:

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

3 circuits in 9 minutes at night in a "decent twin"!

I would like to see that done Howard. Would need to be right up there with my precautionary searches!

Dr :8

[Peter Fanelli]

I'm probably getting a bit rusty on the rules but I believe it's three landings to a full stop to meet the requirement, or maybe it was sometime in the past.
I could be delusional.
Might be the alzheimers kicking in.

[PyroTek]

3 circuits in 9 minutes at night in a "decent twin"!

I would like to see that done Howard. Would need to be right up there with my precautionary searches!

Try it in your new "Baron":} Forkie!

[Ted D Bear]

The relevant definition here is 'flight', I think - which refers to the aircraft first moving for the purposes of taking off until it comes to a stop after landing. So, seems to me the requirement will be met if you fly an hour's worth of circuits if you make sure the aircraft never comes to a complete stop during that period of 1 hour. If you do a full-stop, the clock starts again. Also, a flight that starts before LL but continues after dark will never meet the 1 hour night flight requirement, even if the part done in the dark is an hour or more.

Apart from the technicalities though, I reckon you're kidding yourself if you don't do at least 3 touch and goes (or take-offs and landings) every 90 days and a proper night cross country (preferably taking off and landing somewhere really dark!) at least once a year!

[morno]

As the regs say:

For the carriage of passengers, the pilot in command must have completed 3 take off's and landings at night, within the previous 90 days. The PIC must have also completed a flight of at least 100Nm's or 1hr (whichever is the lesser) from the departure aerodrome within the previous 6 months at night.

And I doubt very highly if the question posed, is legal. It's not so much the landing phase, it's the approach phase you need to be safe in.

morno

[kalavo]

Also, a flight that starts before LL but continues after dark will never meet the 1 hour night flight requirement, even if the part done in the dark is an hour or more.*blinks*

ATPL Air Law has a lot to answer for, people read far too far in to these things and see stuff that just isn't there. No it is not always C or the longest answer.

"in any other case — at least 1 flight of at least 1 hour duration while
flying an aircraft at night as pilot in command, as pilot acting in
command under supervision or in dual flying; and"

If last light is 6:00pm, I take off at 5:30pm, I land at 7:00pm, it goes in to my logbook as 0.5 Day, 1.0 Night (alright before I start another arguement, Logbook time is the time the aircraft moves under its own power for the purposes of taking off until the moment it comes to rest at the end of the flight, ie chock-to-chock or block-to-block), and it is at least 1 flight of at least 1 hour duration while flying an aircraft at night. It doesn't say the entire flight needs to be conducted at night, that both the take off and landing has to be conducted at night (that's a separate requirement in another paragraph) it says I need to conduct 1 flight, of at least 1 hour duration while flying an aircraft at night as P1, ICUS or Dual.

Reminds me of something that regularly appears..

(1) No pilot or pilots, or person or persons acting on the direction or suggestion or supervision of the pilot or pilots may try, or attempt to try or make or make attempt to try to comprehend or understand any or all in whole or in part of the herein mention Civil Aviation Safety Regulations, except as authorised by the CASA.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(2) If the pilot, or group of associated pilots becomes aware of, or realises, or detects, or discovers or finds that he, or she, or they, are or have been beginning to understand the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations, they must immediately, within three (3) days notify CASA in writing.
Penalty: 50 penalty units.
(3) Upon receipt of the above mentioned notice of impending comprehension, CASA will immediately rewrite the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations in such a manner as to eliminate any further comprehension hazards.
(4) CASA may, at their option, require the offending pilot, or pilots, to attend remedial instruction in the Civil Aviation Safety Regulations until such time that the pilot is too confused to be capable of understanding anything.
(5) An offence against subregulation (1) or (2) is an offence of strict liability.
Note For strict liability, see section 6.1 of the Criminal Code.


Paragraph 4 obviously gets used more than we realise. *sigh*


And for the original poster, CASA don't assume aeroplane pilots to be that smart, but they do spell it out for helicopter and gyroplane pilots who think a quick hover is a take off and landing, suggest you follow the advice they give the chopper guys and girls

For the purposes of sub-subparagraphs (d) (i) and (e) (i), a person carries out a
circuit while flying a helicopter or a gyroplane if the person:
(a) takes off in the helicopter or gyroplane from an aerodrome; and
(b) flies the helicopter or gyroplane around the aerodrome in accordance with
the traffic pattern for the aerodrome; and
(c) lands the helicopter or gyroplane at the aerodrome.
5.4 In this subsection:
aerodrome means a place that aircraft may land at, or take of from, in
accordance with regulation 92.
Note: The holder of a night V.F.R. rating must also satisfy the recent experience requirements set out in Part 5 of the Civil Aviation Regulations 1988 in relation to his or her flight crew licence.

[rioncentu]

I fly very little at night. I enjoy the flight bit, but the worry about where to go if the fan stops makes it unnerving for me.

(Ok I don't need to worry - I KNOW where I am going.......)

Anyway - I keep myself current, sometimes having to go out and do the 3 night circuits.

I fly regularly during the day, but even after only 90 days without a night flight, the night circuits feel a bit suss.

So I would NOT skimp on the circuits by trying to do 3 bounces !!

Do your pax a favour a do it properly.

NVFR IMHO is less safe than daytime IFR so don't try and cut corners.

Cheers

[Ted D Bear]

Kalavo - Unfortunately, your flight that starts before LL night won't qualify because the flight (defined as commencing when the aircraft first moved for the purposes of taking off) was not 'at night' - even though it was more than an hour's duration and included more than an hour after LL. Part of the flight was at night, but that is not enough - importantly, a flight must include a take-off and that was done during the day.:=

BTW morno - the one hour flight needs only to be one hour. The 100nm requirement is not there for recency, just for the initial issue of the NVFR rating, except for IFR CHTR ops

[ZEEBEE]

I think the point that is being missed here is that it is a MINIMUM and that the three take-offs and landings is meant to immerse the pilot in the whole experience of night flight.

For instance, one of the biggest killers in night flying is the take-off and climb phase (exacerbated by the "black hole effect").

No way would the bounce down the runway give the exposure to that.

Also, the familiarity of judging distances at night can only be experienced by flying the circuits.

And remember, it IS a minimum...If you don't feel comfortable, do some more ! What price your life and your pax????

[morno]

Ted B Bear,
Have they changed the rules with regards to NVFR recency in recent years? I could have sworn all the things I quoted above were in there when I did my NVFR in 2002! If I'm reading this correctly, you don't even need the minimum 3 take off's and landings in the previous 90 days. :bored:

Straight from CAO 40.2.2

For the purposes of paragraph 9.1, a night V.F.R. rating does not authorise the holder of the rating to fly as pilot in command of an aircraft by night unless:
(a) within the period of 1 year immediately before the day of the proposed flight, he or she has undertaken:
(i) in the case of a balloon grade of night V.F.R. rating — at least 1 flight of at least 30 minutes duration while flying a balloon at night as pilot in command, as pilot acting in command under supervision or in dual flying; and
(ii) in any other case — at least 1 flight of at least 1 hour duration while flying an aircraft at night as pilot in command, as pilot acting in command under supervision or in dual flying; and

(b) in the case of an aeroplane grade of night V.F.R. rating — within the period of 6 months immediately before the day of the proposed flight, he or she has:
(i) carried out at least 1 take-off and 1 landing at night while flying an aeroplane as pilot in command, as pilot acting in command under supervision, or in dual flying; or
(ii) satisfactorily completed an aeroplane flight review or an aeroplane proficiency check that was conducted at least in part at night; or
(iii) passed a flight test that was conducted at night for the purpose of the issue, or renewal, of an aeroplane pilot ratingmorno

[Ted D Bear]

Morno - the requirement for 3 t/offs and landings at night in the last 90 days to carry pax is actually in the CARs (not CAOs) - see CAR 5.82 for PPLs, CAR 5.109 for CPLs).

These requirements were obviously put in the CARs (rather than the CAOs) because it would be too easy for all us poor sods if all the requirements were in the same place ... :ugh:

Zeebee - I agree with you (see my earlier post). Often people get more practice with night landings (with flights that start during the daylight), but night take-offs and climb-out need to be practised often 'coz that can be real scary on a dark night with little ground lighting :eek:

Ted

[morno]

Thanks Ted,
I agree, why don't they just put it all in the one place, :confused::confused:.

Might be time to go through and refamiliarise myself with where everything is in the CAR's/CAO's again I think. Never really think about it too much anymore because currency is never a problem these days.

I am hereby surrendering all advice, because I don't even know the answer myself well enough, :sad:.

Cheers

morno

[PlankBlender]

Ted D Bear, where are you getting this from?

your flight that starts before LL night won't qualify because the flight (defined as commencing when the aircraft first moved for the purposes of taking off) was not 'at night' - even though it was more than an hour's duration and included more than an hour after LL. Part of the flight was at night, but that is not enough - importantly, a flight must include a take-off and that was done during the day.

Night flight means 'flight during night' according to the definition section of the CAR. As long as you're in the air between last and first light for at least an hour, you're all right. Unless there is a specific ruling that interprets CAO 40.2.2. 5.1(a)(ii) to mean the whole flight has to be at night, I think you're over-interpreting the regulation. The formulation 'while flying at night' from said reg would support this IMHO.

So, seems to me the requirement will be met if you fly an hour's worth of circuits if you make sure the aircraft never comes to a complete stop during that period of 1 hour. If you do a full-stop, the clock starts again.

Again, not so methinks, it says 'comes to rest after landing', which would again IMHO exclude stopping on the runway or when crossing for example a parallel runway on the taxi back to the line.

[Ted D Bear]

From a close reading of CAO 40.2.2, mate!

The CAO (Appendix I section 5.1 (a) (ii) doesn't talk about "1 hour while flying at night". It requires "at least 1 flight of at least 1 hour's duration while flying an aircraft at night", and the definition of "flight" in the CARs requires you to take off and land. That means the whole flight needs to be conducted at night. (IMHO, there's a good reason for this!) If conducting part of the flight at night was enough, it would use language similar to that in Appendix I section 5.1(b)(ii) (which talks about a proficiency test conducted at least at part at night).

And I'm not sure I follow the reasonsing for your comment about using circuits to satisfy the requirement (which I don't favour, BTW). If the aircraft stops anywhere (runway, taxi way etc) during the session of circuits, a flight will end and the clock then starts again.

Tedious, I know - but that's what the lawyer in me says the CAO requires!

Ted

[megle2]

Basically all we have achieved so far is confusion!

The original question was " Most likely a really dumb question, but...
How is a take- off and a landing defined"?

There has only been one post with a reasonable explanation.
ie the description for a chopper night circuit.

So with the absence of any definition thats probably how casa would treat it.

[kalavo]

Said it before, I'll say it again, ATPL Air Law rots people's brains.

Ted, I disagree with you.

[Capt Fathom]

Why do people get so bogged down in BS ? It's not that hard!!!!!

Ted D Bear ...

Me thinks you protest too much!

[hole.digger]

Bait taken! Looks like the pedants missed the point again and made a whole lot of noise about something else til we all lost interest...
ted - shhh!

But really, is there a definition somewhere for a takeoff and landing?

Most of us spend our days well within the law, but without the law book to prove it. I put the question out in internet land so that someone who'd stumbled upon a refence might share.
Obviously, the attached scenario would only be attempted by an idiot. Unfortunately, the law applies to every idiot before common sense does. Was curious to see if this was such a case.

[ZEEBEE]

But really, is there a definition somewhere for a takeoff and landing?

Most of us spend our days well within the law, but without the law book to prove it. I put the question out in internet land so that someone who'd stumbled upon a refence might share.
Obviously, the attached scenario would only be attempted by an idiot. Unfortunately, the law applies to every idiot before common sense does. Was curious to see if this was such a case.


In answer to your question Hole Digger, no there probably isn't.
That's because the rules were written before the lawyers got anal and started dissecting things that to pilots was just plain common sense.

The fundamental thing here is to retain proficiency, not comply with some legal point of law.
All the legalities in the world will not help a disoriented pilot on a dark night...ONLY proficiency will.

The rules were written with the blood of pilots gone before....not by legal point scoring.

Every pilot should understand the intent behind the rules and use those as minimums, not targets.

[404 Titan]

Ted D Bear

I think you’re reading too much into it. Just think about it for a moment and imagine how you would remain current. You couldn’t. Look at the intent of the law and the intent of the NVFR rating and all will be revealed. In other words, keep it simple.:ok:

[PlankBlender]

404, wise words :D

[Ted D Bear]

It is simple! And it's easy to stay current. Once a year, take off in the dark, land in the dark, and make sure there's at least an hour in between! :ok:

I'm only reading into it what it says, and mine's a view at least two ATOs and a few senior instructors I've spoken to over the years agree with! And my reading is completely consistent with the rationale for the NVFR rating - the CAO recognises that, mostly, people will use their rating to finish a flight in the dark after taking off during the day. That's why, once a year, we have to do the whole shebang in the dark - to stay current!

Anyhoo - nuff said. It's how I do it, and I'm sure others will make up their own minds ... :zzz:

Ted

[404 Titan]

Ted D Bear

I’ve been in this industry nearly 25 year and use to be an ATO and CFI up until 1996. You are the only person that I’ve ever come across that has interpreted NVFR currency this way. I can assure you though, you, the two ATO’s and senior instructors you mention are most definitely wrong. If you still are not convinced though speak to an aviation lawyer or better still CASA in Canberra. They will put you straight.

The intent of the NFVR rating isn’t to fly from A → B at night. It is to allow you to depart before first light or arrive after last light.

[The Green Goblin]

The rules were written with the blood of pilots gone before....not by legal point scoring.

Every pilot should understand the intent behind the rules and use those as minimums, not targets.

Amen to that!

[ForkTailedDrKiller]

It is simple! And it's easy to stay current. Once a year, take off in the dark, land in the dark, and make sure there's at least an hour in between! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

I have held a Class 4 IR/NVFR rating for 30+ years, and I have never seen that interpretation of the currency requirements before!

Dr :8

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

Once upon a time in a land just above Mexico I did my first session of Night Circuits. I only had about 10 hours total time and standard practice if you had the airfield to yourself and the Instructor felt it safe was to do tear drop circuits. Take off on Runway 27, at 500 feet turn right 80 degrees then left 260 (I later learnt that this is similar to a procedural turn for IF flying) and find yourself rolling out on Final for RWY 09. Do a touch and go then another 80/260 and then roll out on Final for RWY 27. It was a pretty good little trick. I've heard of the same practice being used in Aus for tailwheel training. Probably worth it if you are doing an hours worth of circuits but for three take-offs and landings... just do the circuits and spend what is probably going to be an extra 0.1 of an hour.

BTW, there's no such thing as a NVFR Rating over there, PPL with no restrictions means you can fly; if you don't do the Night stuff then your PPL has a Day Restriction... kind of like Aussie Instrument Ratings. Not better, just different.

[Xcel]

ted, if in a multicrew aircraft the captain completes the t/o and the f/o the landine then i guess under your judgement there was no flight as neither completed a full flight which must include both a t/o and landing...

you have read way to far into it and have confused even yourself...

t/o during day fly for 0.5 then proceed after last light for an hour as said before is 0.5 day 1.0 hour night.. also means you have conducted 1 t/o under day and 1 landing for night which is additive towards your pax requirements... you now need 2 more t/o and 3 landings for day and 3 t/o's 2 landings for night...

hope that made sense.. perfectly clear in my head... struggling for a clear scenario to make it easier to understand for ya...

[Tee Emm]

Do you have to have an endorsement on the aircraft you propose to fly the three night take off and landings? - or can you do them on any aircraft providing an instructor is with you? For example if you haven't ever flown a Cessna 150 will three night landings with an instructor cover the requirement. And how about three take off and landings in an Level D Zero flight time approved full flight simulator which you have never flown before?

[VH-XXX]

I heard someone (an instructor) telling someone else recently (someone that I would have thought should have known about this stuff) that with a NVFR rating you can not start the flight in the dark, plus you must pre-flight the aircraft during daylight times. Any ideas where these beliefs would have come from? Have NVFR regs changed in the last 10+ years or is there some truth in the daylight bit that I missed during my ratings?

[Fred Gassit]

Horsesh%*t debates like this are why our regs are getting heavier by the day, for christs sake, figure the intent of the leg. and stay inside of it!

[404 Titan]

VH-XXX

No, it’s another instructor telling someone bullsh*t. If you want you can fly to your hearts content all at night by the NVFR, as long as it is VFR. The intent of the rating though, and this is where this instructor may be getting confused, is too allow a VFR pilot to get away before first light or arrive after last light.:ok:

[Xcel]

VH-XXX


It is a good idea given the opportunity to preflight during daylight and then just quick walkaround at night - common sense really - perhaps he was just giving advice rather than a ruling. but no nothing has changed... and obviously not always practical.


In saying that, back when instructing had a student walk upto an aircraft at night, seeing very clearly as we walked up this would be a short flight. let them sit down and belt up and ask them if they had walked around... Oh no came the reply I already preflighted like you said during daylight - now 2 hours later - are you sure you dont need to walk around.. oh no its fine came the reply. So I let them start the engine so the vdo starts ticking so i can now be paid for his "lesson", only to stop them after all checklist completed as they try to add power. Someone in packing up and checking the aircraft had put the ropes and chocks back in.:D

[boofhead]

Cheese Louise, why not just bin all that garbage and use ICAO? It is good enough for the rest of the world, are Aussies too dumb or incompetent to fly as well as them without all this ridiculous cr@p?

[bentleg]

Do you have to have an endorsement on the aircraft you propose to fly the three night take off and landings? - or can you do them on any aircraft providing an instructor is with you? For example if you haven't ever flown a Cessna 150 will three night landings with an instructor cover the requirement.

Yes I think it might, but I think that's a bit of a grey area. If you are current and rated on the aircraft by day you can go on your own - don't need the instructor. So better do it on an aircraft you are endorsed on and save yourself the instructor cost.

However if you have not done the one hour NVFR Nav in the last 12 months you need to do one with an instructor to regain NVFR currency. Within 12 months no instructor required.

[Ted D Bear]

According to all the other experts on this thread, you apparently don't need to do a NVFR nav once a year at all. Indeed, one seems to think 10 x 0.1 hours at the end of flights over the course of the year is enough :ugh:

BTW, Titan 404 - and I hate saying this on a forum like this - I am a lawyer ... No doubt, I wouldn't keep many of the posters here as clients for long coz I'd be giving advice they don't like to hear! And I'm sure saying it will now only open me up to a tirade of different criticisms ...

Clearly, if there is no difference between (a) 1 flight of at least 1 hour's duration conducted at night (what the CAO says) and (b) 1 hour of flying conducted at night (how everyone else is reading it), then I'm obviously barking up the wrong tree! I shall now resist any further temptation to comment, because people clearly have their minds made up (just like me!! :)). Let's agree to disagree. No - I'm even happy to say: OK - you're right; I'm wrong :oh:

[404 Titan]

Ted D Bear
According to all the other experts on this thread, you apparently don't need to do a NVFR nav once a year at all. Indeed, one seems to think 10 x 0.1 hours at the end of flights over the course of the year is enough
No one has said that at all. What they have told you is that the one hour can be done as part of a flight that started or ended during the day as long as the 1 hour at night is in one go.

You know I’ve taught a few lawyers to fly in my time. Most were top guys but almost all without exception lacked common sense. I happen to be an accountant by profession. Does that mean I could run the finances of an airline? No. My advice to you is stick with what you know because it is obvious in this case you don’t.

PS: I will leave you with this final question. How many lawyers loose court cases because their interpretation of some law was wrong? And yes I did pick up you were a lawyer.

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

I will leave you with this final question. How many lawyers loose court cases because their interpretation of some law was wrong? And yes I did pick up you were a lawyer.

Ha, I can't help but propose that when it comes down to the outcome of a court-case being a matter of two boffins interpreting the law the percentage of cases lost due to mis-interpretation would be EXACTLY 50%. For every winner there's a loser.

Do you have to have an endorsement on the aircraft you propose to fly the three night take off and landings? - or can you do them on any aircraft providing an instructor is with you? For example if you haven't ever flown a Cessna 150 will three night landings with an instructor cover the requirement.

NO. You simply have to have conducted the take-offs and landings. You'd certainly want to make sure that in doing so you are not breaking any rules though. Say you are out of recency and that you have a PA31 endo which you mistakenly assume includes PA30s so you go do some night circuits in the PA30. You learn that you're an idiot the next morning and that you broke the law the night before but you've got a flight that evening. Do you need to do 3 more circuits? No because you CONDUCTED the appropriate circuits even though they were not actually licit. (Way off track but if Capt BugSmasher's hero-dream comes true and the only surviving pilot of a 737 asks him to fill in as co-pilot for the pilot who just had a heart attack can BugSmasher log it? Just because it isn't ordained or blessed by the Authority doesn't mean that it didn't happen.)

As an extension to the matter of CONDUCTING; say it's been 89 days since your instructor has done her 3 T/O & Ldg and she sits in the right hand seat while you get current and never touches the controls. Despite being PIC for these circuits she will run out of recency the next day. Interestingly the same goes for IF Flight Time when an instructor is PIC with a student in IMC but not doing the flying (manipulating the controls). Technically only the student can log it despite the fact that the instructor is watching things like a hawk. (Instructors please correct me if I am mistaken.)

Know the rules and don't let people dick you around.

FRQ CB

[Xcel]

As an extension to the matter of CONDUCTING; say it's been 89 days since your instructor has done her 3 T/O & Ldg and she sits in the right hand seat while you get current and never touches the controls. Despite being PIC for these circuits she will run out of recency the next day. Interestingly the same goes for IF Flight Time when an instructor is PIC with a student in IMC but not doing the flying (manipulating the controls). Technically only the student can log it despite the fact that the instructor is watching things like a hawk. (Instructors please correct me if I am mistaken.)

Know the rules and don't let people dick you around.


that is an interesting opinion. understand your view on conducting the t/o - landings, but dont the rules say carry out with reference to PIC ICUS and DUAL. In making the point of putting in all 3 categories wouldnt it be read that all parties would be current in such a situation i.e the instructor or person carrying out the supervision during icus... It doesnt refer at any point about manipulating controls as is the case when logging instrument...

Take it one step further as there is the same requirement during day with 3 t/o landings to take pax. are u saying a career instructor again needs to hire or use company a/c to go do a scenic or charter. of course they dont.. they are current...

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

Carry out vs conduct... Oops, my bad. I'm just heading downstairs where I've got some crow waiting for dinner.:}

are u saying a career instructor again needs to hire or use company a/c to go do a scenic or charter. of course they dont.. they are current...

I am confident however that the instructors you mentioned would still need to satisfy the regs by actually doing the take-off and landings themselves. I imagine that in the course of full-time instruction it would not be difficult to maintain the minimum 3 T/O and Ldg every 90 days.

FRQ CB

[Peter Fanelli]

Cheese Louise, why not just bin all that garbage and use ICAO? It is good enough for the rest of the world, are Aussies too dumb or incompetent to fly as well as them without all this ridiculous cr@p?
See what happens when you go liberal and open up to all and sundry (pacific), there goes the neighborhood.

[Xcel]

FRQ,

so in the instance where a student is completing there first ccts ever, u demonstrate one then they go to flare 100 ft above runway and you take over halfway through the landing who logs the landing or the time in cct??

seriously...

as i said get where you coming from and its interesting but i guess common sense never prevails in aviation...

wouldnt worry too much you even ask 3 foi's about something and you will get 3 answers...

[j3pipercub]

I'd love to see a lawyer 'loose' a court case. I just want to see how they do it.

[LeadSled]

Folks,

Just to add a little spice, when does "night" start and end?? Does every country treat it the same way ---- what do our sunrise/sunset graphs actually tell us??

Ted D,
Many times, I have taken off in daylight, watched the sun go down, and (all too) many hours later, watched the sun come up. I took off in daylight, landed in daylight, what do you suggest I should log.

Folks,
As to the purpose of the NVFR rating, it is to fly VFR at night, period. It was never established just so somebody could get airborne a little earlier, or land a little later.

I was highly amused by an FOI (then an Examiner of Airmen) who told me I couldn't fly NVFR without the rating, if I wanted to use my instrument rating, he maintained I had to file IFR, because I wasn't "qualified" to fly VFR at night, which precluded me flying any aircraft at night that was only NVFR equipped.

We were then all signed out with a shiny new NVFR rating, based on the fact we all had instrument ratings. The very same Examiner also refused to recognise multi engine time on an aircraft (well) over 5700 kg, for the purposes of the minimum hours for an "initial" twin endorsement.

This is the arrant garbage that passes for aviation regulation in Australia.

Tootle pip!!

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

Pop quiz hotshots:

Can anybody think of a way in which a non-Night and non-Instrument rated Aeroplane Pilot might legally log command night flying time? I can; stay tuned. (No ICUS or Dual involved, no supervision of an Instructor, no saving the day hero or mercy flight crap and no licenses from a country other than Australia.)

Oh and what the hell, lets just say that there are even passengers onboard.:ok:

FRQ CB

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

when does "night" start and end??

LeadSled,

The technical answer is of course at either the end or beginning of civil daylight which both occur when the sun is 6 degrees below the horizon but in practice we all know that the night truly begins when I arrive and ends when (and if) I decide to shave for work.

FRQ CB

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

Surely the lack of a response to my last post indicates that all 183 of you currently viewing are sitting there waiting with bated breath waiting for me to impart some wonderfully deep and meaningful and age-old aviation secret.

FRQ CB

(Hey three posts in a row from one person, how many more do I need to post to set some PPRuNe loser record?):8

[eocvictim]

Taxiing prior to a departure at the start of BOD, is your answer.

[FRQ Charlie Bravo]

OK Here you go... oh damn you, eocvictim:ok:.

There's also landing just before EOD and the subsequent taxi in (a Rating is reqd to FLY at night but logbook time is movement for the purpose of flight).

Of course I reckon you'd have to be pretty ballsy and hard up for recognition to actually log these decimals of hours.

If I were a moderator I'd definitely lock this thread before I kicked this dead horse any more, it's just not going to run.

FRQ CB - Out.

[boofhead]

The basic rule requires three takeoffs and landings at night to a full stop every 90 days in order to carry passengers, right? (that is what it says in the FARs too).
So if I am not current, all I need to do is jump in and do three by myself before my passengers get aboard, right? (and night landings in a C172 covers me for all singles).
And as an instructor I don't need to be night qualified to fly with my student at night, because he/she is not a passenger, and he/she does not need to be so qualified because neither am I.
I truly cannot understand why you still accept this garbage you have to go through. In the US every private pilot has the right to fly every airplane less than 12,500lb (5700Kg) at night without an "endorsement" or any dual time at all, day or night. In order to carry pax he/she needs the three takeoffs and landings (day and night, some qualifications for tailwheel). One sign off by an instructor covers him/her for the rest of his life for High Performance, Complex, etc. He/she will need to do a check ride for a multi engine rating, but there is no minimum time required and I have put people through that training in a few hours (most take longer). I have flown airplanes here including light sport, experimental, conventional gear, multi engine and the like for the first time as PIC with never an instructor signing me off or even riding with me, and I am not Robinson Crusoe. One instrument rating, which can be maintained simply by using it, covers all airplanes including multi, and can be maintained using an ATD. There is even a change to the rule allowing the instrument rating to be maintained using an ATD without having to have an instructor present to sign off the log book (this is actually a reinterpretation of an existing rule).
My point is that you don't need all these rules that only hold you back and cost you money. It does not make you safer or more competent. The safety record of the US is better than it is in Aus, and that is despite the terrain and weather conditions here that are many times more hazardous than they are in Aus (I flew for 15 years in Aus, 2 years in NG, so I have some clue). I currently work for a flight safety foundation and spend a lot of time with pilots who want to do better. They volunteer and pay for training, which makes it more valuable to them and they are more likely to respect and use that training than if it is stuffed down their throats. Some of my students now own and fly light jets, or are working for major airlines due to their efforts. They know what they need, and very few just go out and try to learn by themselves, so regulation is not needed.
Some people will continue to kill themselves, of course, but they weed themselves out pretty quickly and regulations only apply to the law-abiding anyway. I would bet you all know people who do not comply with all the expensive and mostly unneccessary rules and regulations you labour under, but are they less safe than you? Less competent? I would bet not.
My proof is the statisitics of the US and Aus. In the US it is self-regulated, but much safer. Why do you guys in Aus fail to see that?
Intead of wasting your time trying to interpret these weird rules, go after the regulators and force them to simplify the rules instead. An easy way would be to comply with ICAO or, more easily, simply copy the FARs. Save money, save time, make yourselves more productive and more competitive and fly safer too! How can you not see this?

[PlankBlender]

boofhead, all well and true, but somehow we have to keep all those excess buerocrats busy, hence the superfluous regulation.

Contrary to global perception, Australia is one of the most buerocratic and over-regulated countries in the world. It seems we want to keep lots of people busy who'd otherwise be bumming around on the beach and we can't have that can we :}

At last count over 155,000 public servants to serve just over 20m people, that's double the rate (% of population) as in France, 1 1/2 times that of Germany (these two are the worst regulators in Europe), and over 14 times (!) that of the US..

No surprise really that we have to put up with all this cr@p! :{

[le Pingouin]

At last count over 155,000 public servants to serve just over 20m people, that's double the rate (% of population) as in France, 1 1/2 times that of Germany (these two are the worst regulators in Europe), and over 14 times (!) that of the US..

No surprise really that we have to put up with all this cr@p! :{Plankie, you need to get out more. Whoever you sourced your info from is very unreliable, putting it kindly. Spouting utter BS would be more like it.

US population ~ 300 million or roughly 15 times Australia's. So do you seriously believe the grand total of US public servants is the same as here?

Try 1.8 million. Golly gosh, it's close to the ratio you quote for Australia :ugh: 288,000 work around Washington DC alone.

United States civil service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_civil_service)

France: 1.7 million PS in 1999, population 59 million in 1999

French Civil Service - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_Civil_Service)

We have 1/3 of the PS the French do per person.

[the air up there]

Of course I reckon you'd have to be pretty ballsy and hard up for recognition to actually log these decimals of hours.


Ballsy and hard up is an understatement. Imagine the drama if your log book got audited and you got asked for a please explain from the CP or a CASA FOI. I'm with you, not illegal no, but as you FRQ Charlie Bravo, hard up.

I'm sure one of the lawyer types on here would be able to give us a fancy argument as to how that would breaking the rules.

[PlankBlender]

le_pingouin, apologies, my bad, error in my numbers for Oz, seems we're more on par with the US.. has my head scratching where all the over-regulation comes from, it certainly feels worse than Europe... :sad:

[boofhead]

by following your rules you also make yourselves less competitive in the world. I have students here in the US who legally log their dual time as PIC, who log instrument time when they see a cloud on the way to work, who log as PIC time the time they spend in an old flight training device that is grandfathered in and has no visual, breaks down every 5 minutes, and is worthwhile only to shave the cost of a licence course. I have one who has 250 hours, 50 of which is in one of these old machines, yet he holds the certificate and is in line for a good flying job, once I can get him competent to actually fly approaches.
The rules are only part of the problem. You need to simplify the ones in Aus and then make sure they are followed. Any rule has to make sense and have a purpose. If it is just to create a problem, or a hurdle, get rid of it.

[Joker 10]

Most of the modern Australian rules have been drafted to creat statutory criminal liability in the case of breach.

They are not about Regulating Safety outcomes to promote safety in the air, they are about creating safe prosecutions for maximising penalties.

No carrot to safety, a big stick to bash offenders with.

A vastly different approach to compliance than the educate for safety approach in the U.S. and recent appointments inside the Regulator suggest it is going to get a whole lot worse.

[LeadSled]

Joker 10,
I couldn't agree more ---- and it shows on the air safety outcomes.
Tootle pip!!