NVFR - Removing restrictions and adding endorsements with a CIR/ME
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Actually, its as updated as the self help portal will allow. 
Lasiorhinus, the regs don't mention anything about classes or grades for this discussion.
(I never needed anything more for flight or Taxi)
Lasiorhinus, the regs don't mention anything about classes or grades for this discussion.
(I never needed anything more for flight or Taxi)
Ah, yes, the second taxiing joke in less than a month.
This thread is the first i've ever heard about not being able to fly a charter under NVFR without an instrument rating. It surprises me- while I realise you can fly NVFR with an instrument rating, the concept of requiring an instrument rating for VFR flight is a new one to me.
This thread is the first i've ever heard about not being able to fly a charter under NVFR without an instrument rating. It surprises me- while I realise you can fly NVFR with an instrument rating, the concept of requiring an instrument rating for VFR flight is a new one to me.
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well, the way I had it taught to me back in the day was, SE NVFR ok with just a NVFR for PVT, AWK, non pax CHTR.
ME NVFR is the same, but if wanting to carry pax charter, require a current MECIR.
I can understand that, as it would be risk minimization. enabling a pax carrying CHTR to be undertaken under the VFR, whilst ensuring a higher degree of safety due to the IFR pilots higher standard of training/experiance. probably risk minimization due to weather/cloud being inadvertently experienced due to less vis at night also.
Just my take on it.
yeah, two in one month mate........ just couldn't help it....... sorry
ME NVFR is the same, but if wanting to carry pax charter, require a current MECIR.
I can understand that, as it would be risk minimization. enabling a pax carrying CHTR to be undertaken under the VFR, whilst ensuring a higher degree of safety due to the IFR pilots higher standard of training/experiance. probably risk minimization due to weather/cloud being inadvertently experienced due to less vis at night also.
Just my take on it.
yeah, two in one month mate........ just couldn't help it....... sorry
OK, two a month then
The last one, I agree I kind of left myself open to it... but this one snuck up on me.... technically taxiing between sunset and last light doesnt require NVFR or an IR
The last one, I agree I kind of left myself open to it... but this one snuck up on me.... technically taxiing between sunset and last light doesnt require NVFR or an IR
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: WesternAustralia
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SE Night VFR Charter?
I dont know if you boys and girls are reading the same regs and orders I am. Sometimes I am not sure if some of you old boys are taking the Pi$$. Where abouts does it say anything about non pax SE charter is allowable NVFR by a non IR pilot? 
And where does it say that the aircraft has to be IFR in order to do NVFR charter (single or multi)? 
As a ME IFR instructor of many years now I will break it down simply as the regs that have been quoted seem to hard to conceptualise.
If you are still unsure speak to you local FOI.
And where does it say that the aircraft has to be IFR in order to do NVFR charter (single or multi)? As a ME IFR instructor of many years now I will break it down simply as the regs that have been quoted seem to hard to conceptualise. - A NVFR rating (multi or single) is not a rating that can be used for charter AT ALL. (and there aint a lot of aerial work going for NVFR only punters)
- Freight only charter is still charter
- You cant do RPT either just cause it doesnt specifically say so
- A lot of people have done it and probably will do it in the future.
- Rationalising/arguing the point about whether it was legal for the 100+hrs of bank/mail runs you have in your log book does not make a lick of difference. (Probably felt wrong when you did it too)
- It is a rating that is primarily intended to 'extend daylight' to (mainly) private licence holders in good weather. Do you remember the ATO telling you this on your test? He/She should have.
- If you want to do night charter have a current instrument rating and be current at night. Then you can go NVFR or IFR (your a/c does not HAVE to be IFR so choose your steed wisely).
- If your boss says you dont need a CIR to do charter at night get another boss.
- If you dont understand what I am saying consider this. Charter usually involves an element of time pressure, after all that is why the client is paying more for his pax/goods to travel by air. A 150-200hr pilot (complete with NVFR only) up north about to do is first charter on a poor night in a single that just meets the requirements. The boss says 'if you dont do it there is another who will'. Not willing to sacrifice his job for something that seems 'the norm' the aircraft departs. Character building - yes. Good idea? - no. Much higher risk of reaching the nightly news. PM me if you would like some specific cases - wont post here as they tend to upset people.
- Add another engine and Pax - are you kidding? This has been done and with tragic consequences. At this point quibbling over whether it was allowed legally or not seems trivial.
If you are still unsure speak to you local FOI.
A NVFR rating (multi or single) is not a rating that can be used for charter AT ALL.
It is a rating that is primarily intended to 'extend daylight' to (mainly) private licence holders in good weather. Do you remember the ATO telling you this on your test? He/She should have.
The regs say if you are going to conduct charter at night, as a minimum, you need a current instrument rating to make that call.
It is a rating that is primarily intended to 'extend daylight' to (mainly) private licence holders in good weather. Do you remember the ATO telling you this on your test? He/She should have.
The regs say if you are going to conduct charter at night, as a minimum, you need a current instrument rating to make that call.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: ˙ǝqɐq ǝɯ ʇ,uıɐ ʇɐɥʇ 'sɔıʇɐqoɹǝɐ ɹoɟ uʍop ǝpısdn ǝɯɐu ɹıǝɥʇ ʇnd ǝɯos
Age: 45
Posts: 715
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you dont understand what I am saying consider this. Charter usually involves an element of time pressure, after all that is why the client is paying more for his pax/goods to travel by air. A 150-200hr pilot (complete with NVFR only) up north about to do is first charter on a poor night in a single that just meets the requirements.
Flying at night whether in IMC or VMC comes down to experience. Experience to know whether or not you and your aircraft are capable of the proposed flight in the conditions of the day. The regs say if you are going to conduct charter at night, as a minimum, you need a current instrument rating to make that call.
FRQ CB
It is a rating that is primarily intended to 'extend daylight' to (mainly) private licence holders in good weather. Do you remember the ATO telling you this on your test? He/She should have
I'll have to dig him up (literally!) and talk to him about that!
Dr
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: WesternAustralia
Posts: 12
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
References and Opinions.......
Lasiorhinus .....references......
1. NVFR - No Charter .....CAO 40.2.2 Appendix 1 3.1(a). For clarity read in conjuction (and contrast) with CAO 40.2.1 14.1 (b). If you still think the order is ambiguous read the CAAP on Night VFR specifically section 4.2.2. Still not clear enough refer section 4.5. It is particularly interesting to note that cross country IFR at night does not meet the NVFR cross country requirements. And yes I know CAAP's aren't orders or regs however in this case they spell out clearly CASA's interpretation of the orders.
2. Night VFR is primarily to 'extend daylight'. This is a widely held belief amongst the instructing set. Given the inherent dangers of NVFR particularly in a single, this is a logical step. (if you are not sure of the dangers read the CAAP, particularly section 3.1, and research the references on the first page. I particularly like the 6th one, CASA is really hip with the latest internets. If you are still not convinced you must be right. NVFR is no more dangerous than day VFR.) This is not the only use for a night VFR. NVFR can be safely conducted entirely at night. This can be best demonstrated by flying schools who do it routinely. But then again they are more than happy to cancel a flight due wx. And this is the key to the whole NVFR charter argument... if you arent prepared to cancel more often than not then you should have an instrument rating. This leads to the other use for NVFR....building night PIC hours for an IFR rating (this does not require the rating though) ...
3. This is the same references as in point 1. You cant conduct charter at night without a current instrument rating, IFR or NVFR. Therefore if you would like to make a decision on whether a charter can go at night IFR or NVFR you need an instrument rating. (A little bit circular I know but thats how it plays out)
Freq CB....
This is where the regs have been taliored to suit a person such as yourself. If you consider yourself competent to fly pax NVFR (multi or single) without the benefit of a CIR then you may do so. You just cant charge for it. The layman has no understanding of the differences between NVFR and night IFR and the extra risk that comes with NVFR. If the pilot is instrument rated at least one person in the aircraft is aware of the risks. The GA industry has performed poorly when it comes to NVFR charter by non IFR pilots and hence the rules. ( I have PM'd you something to read)
As to the limitations imposed being and indictment on CASA, ATO's and instructors you should think twice. Instructors and ATO's routinely explore the limits of what a pilot may experience in flight while minimising the actual risk to the flight. Intentional engine failures should not be performed at night (CAAP 5.3.8) so how does one effectively train for and test this? This also a problem for IFR training however it the IFR syllabus is over 4 times longer than NVFR and is much more involved. Add to this the fact that NVFR has no instrument recency requirements and it must be starting to become clearer as to why the current NVFR syllabus/rating does not give NVFR charter as a privilge. This is also inline with industry best practice. Australia is one on only a handful of countries that require a seperate flight test for NVFR but in the majority when disallowing NVFR charter by non IR pilots.
And as for the scenario being a little dramatic well yes I would agree but it would be legal except for the NVFR charter limitation. However if you look at what night flying is available to a CPL NVFR then instruction (airwork) would have to take the bulk of it. It is rare for a CFI to take a new instructor night flying. Even if he/she did it would unlikely be more than 6 or so circuits (night currency for both.) Yet a regular occurance for G3 instructors is night ratings. This all likelyhood consitutes thier first flight for commercial purpose at night without so much as a 'good luck' from thier CP/CFI. Their only saving grace is that if the night is a bit dodgy they can usually reschedule without upsetting anyone.
By the way how exactly did you get your commercial night experience? Suffice to say it probably wasnt in a minimum standard C150 fresh out of your instructor rating or we wouldnt be having this dialogue.
Final thought........
Read the CAAP. It was written by someone who has a firm grasp on the regs/orders and a thorough understanding of what night VFR flight entails.
1. NVFR - No Charter .....CAO 40.2.2 Appendix 1 3.1(a). For clarity read in conjuction (and contrast) with CAO 40.2.1 14.1 (b). If you still think the order is ambiguous read the CAAP on Night VFR specifically section 4.2.2. Still not clear enough refer section 4.5. It is particularly interesting to note that cross country IFR at night does not meet the NVFR cross country requirements. And yes I know CAAP's aren't orders or regs however in this case they spell out clearly CASA's interpretation of the orders.
2. Night VFR is primarily to 'extend daylight'. This is a widely held belief amongst the instructing set. Given the inherent dangers of NVFR particularly in a single, this is a logical step. (if you are not sure of the dangers read the CAAP, particularly section 3.1, and research the references on the first page. I particularly like the 6th one, CASA is really hip with the latest internets. If you are still not convinced you must be right. NVFR is no more dangerous than day VFR.) This is not the only use for a night VFR. NVFR can be safely conducted entirely at night. This can be best demonstrated by flying schools who do it routinely. But then again they are more than happy to cancel a flight due wx. And this is the key to the whole NVFR charter argument... if you arent prepared to cancel more often than not then you should have an instrument rating. This leads to the other use for NVFR....building night PIC hours for an IFR rating (this does not require the rating though) ...
3. This is the same references as in point 1. You cant conduct charter at night without a current instrument rating, IFR or NVFR. Therefore if you would like to make a decision on whether a charter can go at night IFR or NVFR you need an instrument rating. (A little bit circular I know but thats how it plays out)
Freq CB....
This is where the regs have been taliored to suit a person such as yourself. If you consider yourself competent to fly pax NVFR (multi or single) without the benefit of a CIR then you may do so. You just cant charge for it. The layman has no understanding of the differences between NVFR and night IFR and the extra risk that comes with NVFR. If the pilot is instrument rated at least one person in the aircraft is aware of the risks. The GA industry has performed poorly when it comes to NVFR charter by non IFR pilots and hence the rules. ( I have PM'd you something to read)
As to the limitations imposed being and indictment on CASA, ATO's and instructors you should think twice. Instructors and ATO's routinely explore the limits of what a pilot may experience in flight while minimising the actual risk to the flight. Intentional engine failures should not be performed at night (CAAP 5.3.8) so how does one effectively train for and test this? This also a problem for IFR training however it the IFR syllabus is over 4 times longer than NVFR and is much more involved. Add to this the fact that NVFR has no instrument recency requirements and it must be starting to become clearer as to why the current NVFR syllabus/rating does not give NVFR charter as a privilge. This is also inline with industry best practice. Australia is one on only a handful of countries that require a seperate flight test for NVFR but in the majority when disallowing NVFR charter by non IR pilots.
And as for the scenario being a little dramatic well yes I would agree but it would be legal except for the NVFR charter limitation. However if you look at what night flying is available to a CPL NVFR then instruction (airwork) would have to take the bulk of it. It is rare for a CFI to take a new instructor night flying. Even if he/she did it would unlikely be more than 6 or so circuits (night currency for both.) Yet a regular occurance for G3 instructors is night ratings. This all likelyhood consitutes thier first flight for commercial purpose at night without so much as a 'good luck' from thier CP/CFI. Their only saving grace is that if the night is a bit dodgy they can usually reschedule without upsetting anyone.
By the way how exactly did you get your commercial night experience? Suffice to say it probably wasnt in a minimum standard C150 fresh out of your instructor rating or we wouldnt be having this dialogue.
Final thought........
Read the CAAP. It was written by someone who has a firm grasp on the regs/orders and a thorough understanding of what night VFR flight entails.
Not that I doubt you at all Wiz, but a reference goes a long way in dispelling ideas that its an old wives tale.
You may know who told me that "its OK to fly an aircraft with an expired MR, as long as occasionally you send it in for maintenance while its still got time left."
Funnily enough, I never found a reference for that gem.
You may know who told me that "its OK to fly an aircraft with an expired MR, as long as occasionally you send it in for maintenance while its still got time left."
Funnily enough, I never found a reference for that gem.
Bugsmasherdriverandjediknite
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Bai, mi go long hap na kisim sampla samting.
Posts: 2,849
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bwaaahahahaha..... I can imagine where that gem came from. 
I heard several others as well.... you know, things like you don't really require cargo nets, you don't need to read the ops manual and sign it for at least six months, you don't really require fuel gauges in the dash if the ones in the wings (non calibrated and in different units to the other side) work....... you can almost see em if you stretch ya neck a bit. Ohh I forgot the charter within a charter within a charter one.
Thank gawd thats all over.
I heard several others as well.... you know, things like you don't really require cargo nets, you don't need to read the ops manual and sign it for at least six months, you don't really require fuel gauges in the dash if the ones in the wings (non calibrated and in different units to the other side) work....... you can almost see em if you stretch ya neck a bit. Ohh I forgot the charter within a charter within a charter one.
Thank gawd thats all over.
