SE CAT flights at Night quiz

[SFIM]

I was reading about this historic CFIT accident:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Death_of_Stevie_Ray_Vaughan

I wondered are single engine commercial flights with passengers at night such as that above still allowed now in the USA?

they were banned in the UK from around 1985 I think, I met the pilot who claimed he did the last ever charter on the last day allowed just before midnight, but he didn't tell me what year it was.

[aa777888]

Yes, still allowed.

[MikeNYC]

What does a CFIT accident have to do with SE flight?

[Robbiee]

Maybe having a second engine allows you to see through the fog?

[SFIM]

What does a CFIT accident have to do with SE flight?

Maybe having a second engine allows you to see through the fog?

i agree, they arent my rules.

seems to me that whether the aircraft stabilised is stabilised or not is more relevant than the number of engines

[JackJones]

I'm with Mike on this one, how does the aircraft being twin engine make is less likely to experience CFIT? Furthermore how does a SE helicopter know that it is flying at night, therefore more likely to suffer an engine failure?

When I fly at night (non CAT) my only pre-requisite is an aircraft with a good panel fit, there are certain aircraft only a true nutter would fly at night (thinking R22), but as for the SE or ME argument, is see no more risk from day CAT to night CAT for SE ops

[SASless]

You folks in the UK and Europe can never claim to be "under regulated" can you?

You also operate one very expensive Aviation Infrastructure....with a Fee for everything you do, buy, and use.

At least in the USA we see Aviation as being something that benefits the entire population and support it with Tax monies from non-aviation sources as well as those uniquely applying to aviation unlike you folks.

Our system is far more user friendly to boot.

It is not perfect and in time as our amount of bureaucracy begins to catch up with yours in its ability to stifle operations.....we will be burdened as well.

[Robbiee]

I'm with Mike on this one, how does the aircraft being twin engine make is less likely to experience CFIT? Furthermore how does a SE helicopter know that it is flying at night, therefore more likely to suffer an engine failure?

When I fly at night (non CAT) my only pre-requisite is an aircraft with a good panel fit, there are certain aircraft only a true nutter would fly at night (thinking R22), but as for the SE or ME argument, is see no more risk from day CAT to night CAT for SE ops

Well then call me pistachio because I flew an R22 up to the city a few nights ago on a sight seeing flight.

So how does flying at night make it more likely to suffer an engine failure?

[JackJones]

Well then call me pistachio because I flew an R22 up to the city a few nights ago on a sight seeing flight.

So how does flying at night make it more likely to suffer an engine failure?

It doesn't - I am far from a Robbo basher, in fact I learnt to aviate in an R22 however we all know they aren't the most stable of machines, so at night with a less than perfect horizon, my choice of aircraft would not be the R22, R44 yes but 22 no, sorry.

[aa777888]

All of my night training for PPL-H was in an R22. I noticed no particular challenges maintaining stability at night. You either have a sufficient horizon or you don't. If you don't then you are not VFR := If you start getting into questions about how much of a horizon you have, or needing "a good panel fit", then perhaps it is time to file IFR ;) YMMV, personal minimums and all that sort of thing...

[JackJones]

Possibly true regarding horizons VFR IFR etc, however I've personally flown (legally) VFR day with no discernible horizon at all - should that too have been IFR?

I completed my night rating here in the U.K. at Gloucester in an R22, and I'm not ashamed to admit that I found it difficult. Had it been a larger or more stable machine would I have found it easier? Yeah maybe.

Our point about the 22 is pointless to this thread anyway, as the R22 is not a CAT machine

[Robbiee]

Just as any helicopter, the 22 is as stable as the pilot's abilities make it. The first time I flew a Sikorsky S55 I was rocking a bit while hovering, that wasn't the machines fault, then in time I hovered it perfectly fine.

So what's a CAT helicopter anyway?

[SFIM]

seems to me that whether the aircraft stabilised is stabilised or not is more relevant than the number of engines

it makes sense to me that for a commercial flight with passengers at night that the helicopter should be stabilised with a trim system such as SAS (not floppy stick) and this is available even now even on an R44.

[aa777888]

Possibly true regarding horizons VFR IFR etc, however I've personally flown (legally) VFR day with no discernible horizon at all - should that too have been IFR?No, not if WX was within VFR limits and you had sufficient visual references to fly without reference to instruments. However those same conditions would likely be effectively IFR at night, regardless of the legalities. No need to split hairs. You can either see good enough to safely fly without instruments or you can't, depending on your personal minimums and capabilities. It can be severe clear but over rugged terrain with no lights on the ground or moon in the sky that might not be enough. But I'm sure I'm writing the obvious.

Our point about the 22 is pointless to this thread anyway, as the R22 is not a CAT machineThat depends. The OP asked about single engine night op's in the US. Those would all be CAT B helicopters per the US definition, but really it would appear the question is about commercial op's. Certainly R22s are used quite often for a wide variety of commercial operations: sightseeing, photo missions, training, etc. This includes night flying, and R22s are regularly operated at night for all of those purposes.

[krypton_john]

Well then call me pistachio because I flew an R22 up to the city a few nights ago on a sight seeing flight.

So how does flying at night make it more likely to suffer an engine failure?

It doesn't. But landing from autorotation in the dark is pretty difficult!

[SASless]

But landing from autorotation in the dark is pretty difficult!


Really?

If the engine fails in a single engine aircraft....day or night....you are guaranteed a landing.

The difficulty at night particularly is making a safe landing.

[whoknows idont]

If the engine fails in a single engine aircraft....day or night....you are guaranteed a landing.

The difficulty at night particularly is making a safe landing.

So you define a landing as impacting the surface and/or obstacles at any given vertical and/or horizontal speed? Basically just the very termination of flight? Interesting!

[Robbiee]

It doesn't. But landing from autorotation in the dark is pretty difficult!

Pshaw, you're more likely to hit something on the way in (power on) in the dark than you are to have to worry about the touchdown from an auto.

[casper64]

Hmmm… have half of us here switched of their brains or just acting stupid? Luckily a few made some sense in the end.
In a SE when your engine fails... you go down... during the night it's pretty damn hard to see WHERE until its too late....(unless you are flying NVGs or over a big City where there are less options to safely land...). In a Twin, you say "oops one of my engines failed, let's lower the collective a little and head to the nearest airfield where a SAFE landing can be made." Not a somewhat controlled crash (yes… you can be stabilised….still going down!) into the unknown….

Of course it is a seperate discussion about the chance of an engine failing…. cause indeed the SE`s nowadays are pretty reliable. But then we can challenge a lot of operations… we could even argue to build a big airliner with 1 engine… might be more efficient, but I wouldn´t get on one.

[Thomas coupling]

Cut the crap lads. SFIM hit the nail on the head...it's all about stabilised or unstabilised platforms.
The guy took off in a Jet Box (probably unstabilised). He took off in fog FFS! He turned left abruptly....Smacks of a UP to me. The end.

The brits did away with the last of our SE helos many years ago which was a Jet box with AP.
The brits (CAA) did away with SE helos for CAT @ night for a number of reasons, not only stab/unstab or SE Vs ME.
They looked at the stats over the years and came to the conclusion that fee paying pax deserved more of a safety margin than an unstabilised SE helo at night.

Argue all you like about Robbo's Vs Twinstar's. Stab Vs unstab, VFR Vs IFR, night Vs day. The ONLY place for an unstabilsed SE helo in this (safety conscious) day and age is day VFR, COCISS.

[krypton_john]

Really?

If the engine fails in a single engine aircraft....day or night....you are guaranteed a landing.

The difficulty at night particularly is making a safe landing.

OK may I re-phrase my attempted quick comment into a wordy one then? In the dark it's hard to identify a suitable, open, smooth surfaced area, free of obstacles and wires to autorotate into, it's hard to gauge the wind direction and it's hard to judge the flare.

And after you have done all that it's probably going to be hard to walk away from it!

[aa777888]

COCISS? .

[Robbiee]

The ONLY place for an unstabilsed SE helo in this (safety conscious) day and age is day VFR, COCISS.

Glad we Yanks haven't progressed to your day and age!

[Flying Bull]

COCISS? .
Clear
of
Cloud
in
sight of
surface

[Thomas coupling]

Robbie
Thats why you yanks will continue to make CFIT a sport.
And please don't tell me you fly a robbo as well? :O

[SASless]

TC,

Please do explain how you arrived at that conclusion?

CFIT accidents never happen in the UK or EASA Land?

[malabo]

Stabilized as the solution? We flew Day/Night IFR for years on medvac with unstabilized Bell222UT. Never an issue. Even did the odd single-pilot hard IFR night flight, just for the challenge. After all, it was certified for single-pilot IFR. Have since seen lots of stabilized 139, 92, 76’s stove in CFIT.
Try again.

[Robbiee]

Robbie
Thats why you yanks will continue to make CFIT a sport.
And please don't tell me you fly a robbo as well? :O

Yep I do. Over 300 CFIT free night hours, mostly sight seeing flights around a nicely lighted city in the little old R22, plus about 180 of that is night xc, and yep, still in the 22.

We yanks do a lot of night tours in Robbo's and Jetboxes. CFIT is for HEMS

Now excuse me while I find some wood to knock on :)

[SASless]

TC....how many night and IMC hours did the US Army fly in OH-6, 13, 23, UH-1, H-19,21, 25, 34, TH-55, and TH-57's? The odd couple of Million or so.....all single engine and un-stabilized....some with only basic instruments and a mag compass.

I am thinking your fingers are operating independently of your brain again.

[SFIM]

Stabilized as the solution? We flew Day/Night IFR for years on medvac with unstabilized Bell222UT. Never an issue. Even did the odd single-pilot hard IFR night flight, just for the challenge. After all, it was certified for single-pilot IFR. Have since seen lots of stabilized 139, 92, 76’s stove in CFIT.
Try again.

if you don’t have the visual references then the stabilisation clearly increases safety, and its very easy to lose the visual references at night as you can’t see the cloud coming or the unlit terrain as in the 1982 accident above.

i have 750 hours at night in a mixture of stabilised and unstabilised platforms.

[homonculus]

On the nail SFIM, but stabilisation has nothing to do with CFIT because if you lose it in an unstabilised cab it isnt CFIT but UFIT - totally uncontrolled. How can stabilisation prevent CFIT?

And for the record single engine IFR is totally acceptable to the CAA - ask the boys at Kemble

[SFIM]

And for the record single engine IFR is totally acceptable to the CAA - ask the boys at Kemble

as I said twice above i agree the number of engines is not relevant especially modern turbines.

[Thomas coupling]

SAS: Them there's mil pilots, mate.
BIG difiference between mil drivers @ night unstab and the lumpen proletariat in their Meccano kits @ night/Unstab.:ooh:

Hi Homonculus, how's life in the medical world?

Stab at night 'assists' the pilot when he/she has a 'wobbly'....and loses SA. It's that little difference between life and death at times!
Who you talking about @ Kemble?

As for you Malabo - not biting!

[AnFI]

OP it was stopped in 1988 in UK, but not as a result of any accident

some strange statements on here
- like the idea that you can't see clouds coming - of course you can see where there aren't clouds.
- like the mention of engines, not relevant
- stabilisation, are we breeding a generation that cant fly without stabilisation?

[Robbiee]

OP it was stopped in 1988 in UK, but not as a result of any accident

some strange statements on here
- like the idea that you can't see clouds coming - of course you can see where there aren't clouds.


Ha! funny

[haihio]

I’ve flown at night in Robbies and aircraft that are suppose to be ifr capable like as355 f models. I think the 355 without the autopilot and trim is more unsteady and unstabilised than an r22.