Black Hole approaches without visual glide slope guidance
Not a problem with the Gold Coast as it is 2500 x 45m of runway coming into a well lit environment. Ballina is 1900 x 30m of poorly lit sub standard runway. To all those who haven't flown an RPT jet into the place your opinions are limited and mostly uninformed. The black hole approach isn't about how good a pilot you are, although there are obviously many on this thread that are in the FIGJAM category, its about the visual cues necessary to avoid potential disorientation on final.
Moderator
is simply poor instrument flying scan
Is that not the main problem with many of these illusions ? .. the middle ear (or other terrestrially-evolved perception mechanism) sets the scene .. the pilot either then overrides the problem by controlling the hazardous sensation (no real difference with any form of the "leans" in my view) via rigid, disciplined I/F flying on the clocks ... or lets go of the scan discipline, reverts to seat of the pants in the absence of a definite horizon ... and another victim enters the Book of Statistics ....
.. and the only real difference for the I/F folk .. is that chaps with the comparatively vast experience of the Centaurus's amongst us ... have learned sufficient to make the solution much easier than it is for the new chums ...
Is that not the main problem with many of these illusions ? .. the middle ear (or other terrestrially-evolved perception mechanism) sets the scene .. the pilot either then overrides the problem by controlling the hazardous sensation (no real difference with any form of the "leans" in my view) via rigid, disciplined I/F flying on the clocks ... or lets go of the scan discipline, reverts to seat of the pants in the absence of a definite horizon ... and another victim enters the Book of Statistics ....
.. and the only real difference for the I/F folk .. is that chaps with the comparatively vast experience of the Centaurus's amongst us ... have learned sufficient to make the solution much easier than it is for the new chums ...
JT-That is precisely the problem. It has nothing to do with a person's ability, although experience and mutli-crew may mitigate against it. The standard of the runway and the approach environment are what determines whether this visual trap will be sprung.
Moderator
I see it as being a tad more complex than that ...
(a) the wider set of circumstances can conspire to set the scene for disaster. Sure we have financial constraints which make for some runways to be more of a problem than others etc ..
(b) whatever mitigation can be brought to bear ought to be
(c) much of the pilot side of the mitigation strategies resides in training and experience - and knowledge of such illusions and the circumstances when they might be expected to occur
(d) ability and, more particularly, knowledge, experience and training, are vital defences
(e) rigour in disciplined response to the illusions is essential to minimising their impact on the day
.. at the end of the day, there are no easy outs ... unless you are able to constrain your flying to occur only on calm, sunny days in benign aircraft ?
(a) the wider set of circumstances can conspire to set the scene for disaster. Sure we have financial constraints which make for some runways to be more of a problem than others etc ..
(b) whatever mitigation can be brought to bear ought to be
(c) much of the pilot side of the mitigation strategies resides in training and experience - and knowledge of such illusions and the circumstances when they might be expected to occur
(d) ability and, more particularly, knowledge, experience and training, are vital defences
(e) rigour in disciplined response to the illusions is essential to minimising their impact on the day
.. at the end of the day, there are no easy outs ... unless you are able to constrain your flying to occur only on calm, sunny days in benign aircraft ?
Being ex-RFDS, the old black-hole approach used to be common place. However I feel the basic concepts of a normal approach day or night always remain the same.
In the RFDS we were always taught to keep a standard profile configuration (ie abeam the threshold gear down etc...) and start timing (20 seconds abeam), keep ROD below 1000' ftpm at approach speeds. If any of these parameters were exceeded 'go round' and have another crack.
The biggest trap with all black-hole approaches was what was stored in your sub-conscious, meaning if you had come from a big strip (e.g. YPPD or YPLM) that is what you related the approach to. So it could come as something of a shock when you found the runway suddenly rushing up to meet you. However if you are configured, on speed, on a stabilised approach it doesn't take much to react and basically flare the aircraft.
The other trap with limited flare path/black hole approaches would sometimes happen when you join crosswind. Normally you join x-wind at most airstrips and look down to your left (LH circuit) and see all the lights leading back to your landing point. However with a shorter strip and limited lighting (e.g. kero flares) this whole 'expected' view disappears under the wing or is very faint due very dim lighting. Your immediate thought can be, 'Oh **** I've lost visual contact...' but in reality all you need do is go back to the instruments fly a standard pattern circuit for your aircraft and have another look approaching late down wind.
Of course all of this is much easier these days as I now have an extra head up the front to bounce things off......
cheers Sarcs
In the RFDS we were always taught to keep a standard profile configuration (ie abeam the threshold gear down etc...) and start timing (20 seconds abeam), keep ROD below 1000' ftpm at approach speeds. If any of these parameters were exceeded 'go round' and have another crack.
The biggest trap with all black-hole approaches was what was stored in your sub-conscious, meaning if you had come from a big strip (e.g. YPPD or YPLM) that is what you related the approach to. So it could come as something of a shock when you found the runway suddenly rushing up to meet you. However if you are configured, on speed, on a stabilised approach it doesn't take much to react and basically flare the aircraft.
The other trap with limited flare path/black hole approaches would sometimes happen when you join crosswind. Normally you join x-wind at most airstrips and look down to your left (LH circuit) and see all the lights leading back to your landing point. However with a shorter strip and limited lighting (e.g. kero flares) this whole 'expected' view disappears under the wing or is very faint due very dim lighting. Your immediate thought can be, 'Oh **** I've lost visual contact...' but in reality all you need do is go back to the instruments fly a standard pattern circuit for your aircraft and have another look approaching late down wind.
Of course all of this is much easier these days as I now have an extra head up the front to bounce things off......
cheers Sarcs
Thread Starter
My understanding of the black hole illusion is the danger of a long final without any glide slope guidance where one relies solely on the visual aspect of the runway or airstrip. The general advice I have read is to avoid that situation by overflying and joining downwind for a normal circuit.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Post from Muffinman
....it does seem strange to watch so much money finding its way into security and other related capital expenditure at many remote airfields yet minimal if nil spending in areas of OCHS. As a pilot we are regularly exposed and expected (often by our peers) to deal with situations that demand full use of our skills and training often as a result of inappropriate funding - in this day and age we watch the dollars get thrown at so many dubious areas in our lives, yet a simple PAPI installation at any location that requires night operations would be mandatory.
Excellent post. I am sure that each RPT operator has a system of reporting issues that may be considered a threat to the day to day operation. How many of us have ever raised, be it formally or informally, this exact issue with our respective safety departments and then taken the time to follow up the issue. If nothing has been done, report it again. It must also be highlighted the worst case scenario of last sector of a 10 hour day, 6th sector, instrument approaches all day etc. Not at the peak of our game I am sure. Situations like this are all to common place in this day and age.
Black hole approach. Several years ago flew into Windorah in South West Qld at night. Visibility reduced to about 5km due to dust. Stable on the approach with the runway lined up. About 50 ft AGL the runway lights start to disappear due to the huge hump in the middle of the strip such that at the touch down point you only had about 3 runway light visible. To make matters worse, the runway is a very dirty brown (bituman) colour which blended in with the airbourne dust that was lit up by the landing lights. Depth perception as good as gone. Then on the landing roll out, skippy jumps out in from of the aircraft. All equals a pucker factor of 10.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Somatagravic??
When I see the term "somatacravic" I also think of leadoxybromide, and similtaneous double engine failure and outcome based investigation.
Our ATSB people are very good at collecting information and reporting it but I must sometimes wonder about some of their assumptions. Like the west wind captain at Alice Springs who was said to be outside the tracking tolerances, but no mention was made of the fact that the approach that was shown in the chart to be straight was in fact bent and had a built in four degree error.
That approach disappeared after the accident.
Black hole approaches are not uncommon outside the J curve, and CFIT is lurking there all the time. Why?? Because the visual cues that we use are not there at night, and we do not realise this. There is an automatic altitude awareness in the daytime that we are not aware of. It is not there at night, and it is VERY easy to descend into the ground. I had to scare myself to find that out. Knowing elevations and monitoring the altimeter frequently are essential factors. Even if you think you are visual your altitude awareness is not there.
Have you ever wondered why your aeroplane seems to be very unstable at night?
Ever heard of "magnetic fog"? In the days of Kingsford Smith and others, they were puzzled as to why it took longer to fly a distance in cloud or fog than in the clear, and, the compass got very active in "fog" So they talked about " magnetic fog"
Today I think we know the answer to both of those things.
There is also an illusion that lights on the ground can appear to oscilate up and down at night under some conditions. It is real.
Black hole approaches can be flown usng the appearance of the runway lights for rough glideslope guidance but it needs much concentration, and altitude monitorung. When you do that you are working with very little information, and your aeroplane should be configured early so you do not get distracted. Especially if you are using kerosine flares.
One night in Alice Springs we had two blokes doing night circuits when the power failed. Not only did the runway lights go off just after they got airbourne, but all the town lights did too. They were VFR pilots and they crashed.
An IFR two pilot westwind was making a "triple NDB" approach at night for practise and due to altitude errors a cfit occurred. Ironically conditions were vmc at the time and a T VASIS was available.
Be careful out there.
Our ATSB people are very good at collecting information and reporting it but I must sometimes wonder about some of their assumptions. Like the west wind captain at Alice Springs who was said to be outside the tracking tolerances, but no mention was made of the fact that the approach that was shown in the chart to be straight was in fact bent and had a built in four degree error.
That approach disappeared after the accident.
Black hole approaches are not uncommon outside the J curve, and CFIT is lurking there all the time. Why?? Because the visual cues that we use are not there at night, and we do not realise this. There is an automatic altitude awareness in the daytime that we are not aware of. It is not there at night, and it is VERY easy to descend into the ground. I had to scare myself to find that out. Knowing elevations and monitoring the altimeter frequently are essential factors. Even if you think you are visual your altitude awareness is not there.
Have you ever wondered why your aeroplane seems to be very unstable at night?
Ever heard of "magnetic fog"? In the days of Kingsford Smith and others, they were puzzled as to why it took longer to fly a distance in cloud or fog than in the clear, and, the compass got very active in "fog" So they talked about " magnetic fog"
Today I think we know the answer to both of those things.
There is also an illusion that lights on the ground can appear to oscilate up and down at night under some conditions. It is real.
Black hole approaches can be flown usng the appearance of the runway lights for rough glideslope guidance but it needs much concentration, and altitude monitorung. When you do that you are working with very little information, and your aeroplane should be configured early so you do not get distracted. Especially if you are using kerosine flares.
One night in Alice Springs we had two blokes doing night circuits when the power failed. Not only did the runway lights go off just after they got airbourne, but all the town lights did too. They were VFR pilots and they crashed.
An IFR two pilot westwind was making a "triple NDB" approach at night for practise and due to altitude errors a cfit occurred. Ironically conditions were vmc at the time and a T VASIS was available.
Be careful out there.
Last edited by bushy; 27th Aug 2008 at 07:49.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop it "Bushy" yr scaring the kids & ME
I wish people would only be stupid & get sick during office hrs & when the sun is shinning, that way I only have to read about black hole app's instead of constantly performing them!
Here's a good one. AT YBDG it's R/H circuits on RWY 35 to avoid overflying the town/city (out to the west). But when it's pouring rain rough as guts & viz is poor a R/H circuit in a B200 is just asking for it just to make the residents feel more comfy & not have to turn the volume up to what yet another TV game show !
Do we need more initial IF training at PVT level? I guess it's not just the initial it's the ongoing or lack of it that can catch some out.
Good words indeed 'Bushy'.....be careful out there!
CW
I wish people would only be stupid & get sick during office hrs & when the sun is shinning, that way I only have to read about black hole app's instead of constantly performing them!
Here's a good one. AT YBDG it's R/H circuits on RWY 35 to avoid overflying the town/city (out to the west). But when it's pouring rain rough as guts & viz is poor a R/H circuit in a B200 is just asking for it just to make the residents feel more comfy & not have to turn the volume up to what yet another TV game show !
Do we need more initial IF training at PVT level? I guess it's not just the initial it's the ongoing or lack of it that can catch some out.
Good words indeed 'Bushy'.....be careful out there!
CW
IMHO - the somatogravic illusion is entirely preventable with a good scan and knowledge and expectation of the aircraft performance. For those not expecting it and not doing the scans, it's quite unfortunate that it happens very close to the unforgiving ground.
But back to black hole approaches and this thread...
For those interested, it's possible to have "white hole" approaches too landing (with skis) on featureless snow slopes. What gets tricky is having no depth perception at any stage - so it's like a black hole approach with no aircraft landing lights ....
But back to black hole approaches and this thread...
For those interested, it's possible to have "white hole" approaches too landing (with skis) on featureless snow slopes. What gets tricky is having no depth perception at any stage - so it's like a black hole approach with no aircraft landing lights ....
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Permanently lost
Posts: 1,785
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahhh............
all those episodes of Hill Street Blues come rushing back.
On a more serious note I found that when I took up my present job the night circling approaches were the hardest part. Sure I had built up some night experience before but mostly into well-lit and aided runways.
Tennant Creek is only a partial black hole, the town sits on the south eastern side of the airport but once north of the place on a dark night it is pure instrument territory until turning south again. Rwy 07 has a T Vasis but Rwy 11 is usually the preferred runway, especially this time of the year with the "Barkly Breeze" blowing overnight.
Dark night, lots of dust in the air and turbulent, I have had my moments especially on the downwind to base legs where I found that if you let your scan slip (e.g. trying to look for the runway) the descent rate would creep up. Now it is scan/scan/scan until the runway appears through the screen instead of the side. The approach is invariably the same each time (day or night) and turn points are timed or based on altitude and GPS distance. I try not to re-invent the wheel each time. Get it stable by a mile to run to touchdown, if not, do it again.
There has been some great advice on the thread by people I know, some personally, others by reputation, but whose views I have come to respect. Night visual circling approaches don't get a lot of time in training so this thread is invaluable. I hope others get as much from it as I do.
.....be careful out there!
On a more serious note I found that when I took up my present job the night circling approaches were the hardest part. Sure I had built up some night experience before but mostly into well-lit and aided runways.
Tennant Creek is only a partial black hole, the town sits on the south eastern side of the airport but once north of the place on a dark night it is pure instrument territory until turning south again. Rwy 07 has a T Vasis but Rwy 11 is usually the preferred runway, especially this time of the year with the "Barkly Breeze" blowing overnight.
Dark night, lots of dust in the air and turbulent, I have had my moments especially on the downwind to base legs where I found that if you let your scan slip (e.g. trying to look for the runway) the descent rate would creep up. Now it is scan/scan/scan until the runway appears through the screen instead of the side. The approach is invariably the same each time (day or night) and turn points are timed or based on altitude and GPS distance. I try not to re-invent the wheel each time.
Get it stable by a mile to run to touchdown, if not, do it again.There has been some great advice on the thread by people I know, some personally, others by reputation, but whose views I have come to respect. Night visual circling approaches don't get a lot of time in training so this thread is invaluable. I hope others get as much from it as I do.
Last edited by PLovett; 26th Aug 2008 at 11:23. Reason: Clarification
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PLovett says
Rwy 07 has a T Vasis but Rwy 11 is usually the preferred runway, especially this time of the year with the "Barkly Breeze" blowing overnight.
Rwy 07 has a T Vasis but Rwy 11 is usually the preferred runway, especially this time of the year with the "Barkly Breeze" blowing overnight.
Thread Starter
Way up in the Central Pacific region there is a series of tiny atolls in a circle and called Tarawa. During the war Tarawa was the battle ground between US marines and Japanese forces who defended the atoll to the death, The centre-piece of Tarawa is a rather picturesque blue lagoon called of course, Tarawa Lagoon.
The airstrip serving Tarawa is on the atoll of Bonriki and a three aircraft company owned by the government operated from Bonriki to several atolls in the Kiribati group. In my days they had Islanders and Trislanders and Air Nauru operated into the place with their 737-200's and 727-100's. There were no runway lights although battery powered emergency runway lanterns were in the store at the airport in case needed. Mostly the batteries were dry cell and useless. There were no spares. Later the Chinese had a deal with the local government and re-surfaced the airstrip and even laid runway lights. The lights were quickly vandalised by the local Bonriki bogans.
Fortunately we (Air Nauru) never had to divert into Bonriki at night so we never relied on the standby lights and in any case without VASIS the airport was a health hazard. It would have been the classic black hole par excellence with unreliable battery lights and no VASIS with the final approaches to both ends of the runway over the Pacific ocean.
One day an Air Nauru pilot reported seeing a funny sort of VASIS with single red and white light source. There was no NOTAM about the new VASIS but that was ops normal for the Pacific islands anyway. He flew the VASIS and nearly ended up scraping the wheels of the 727 through the lagoon.
More reports came through of the Bonriki VASIS and all said it was set awfully low. Fortunately, Bonriki was a day light only airport. On investigation the VASIS looked rather like an old age British letter pillar or post box like the ones you see on street corners in the old day. . And it was painted bright bred too plus it had two light bulbs if I recall.
. Christ knows what the light angles were set at but my guess from previous experiences at calibrating VASIS in Australia, was around two degrees or less.
Air Nauru DCA contacted his counterpart at Tarawa (each was a one man band Directorate of Civil Aviation) and asked who had flight tested this red/white contraption and if so was it officially commissioned or merely "on test."
Back came the reply by telex - "Has not been commissioned but Air Pacific say it looks OK." Air Pacific operated a de Havilland Heron into Bonriki so a bloody reliable opinion that turned out to be!
Air Nauru immediately told its crews not to use the VASIS under any ccircumstances. A few months later the VASIS was loaded on to a battered old truck and left to rot in the cargo shed. Turned out it was a former New Zealand (?) primitive light source contraption used for crop-dusters. The Tarawa DCA guy had seen pictures of this thing in some aviation magazine and thought what a splended idea it would be to have one at Tarawa.
He bought one with government funds and it shipped up cheaply and stuck it into the ground, connected it to some batteries and hey presto! a real cheap aid (?) to visual navigation. Why worry about a NOTAM?
Couple of months afterwards a USA FAA airways inspector happended to pass through Bonriki and I showed him the sad looking bright red VASIS toppled into the spider infested corner of the cargo shed. He was speechless and said it was a priceless relic and bought it on the spot and had it shipped to a aviation museum in USA.
I have often wondered about the accuracy and reliability of the various PAPI/VASIS installed around contry aerodromes in Australia and funded by the local council. Are they flight tested regularly by qualified calibration personnel or do they rely purely on pilot reports if something doesn't look quite right. Remember the Air Pacific Heron pilot on the Bonriki "VASIS."..
Bit of thread creep there...
The airstrip serving Tarawa is on the atoll of Bonriki and a three aircraft company owned by the government operated from Bonriki to several atolls in the Kiribati group. In my days they had Islanders and Trislanders and Air Nauru operated into the place with their 737-200's and 727-100's. There were no runway lights although battery powered emergency runway lanterns were in the store at the airport in case needed. Mostly the batteries were dry cell and useless. There were no spares. Later the Chinese had a deal with the local government and re-surfaced the airstrip and even laid runway lights. The lights were quickly vandalised by the local Bonriki bogans.
Fortunately we (Air Nauru) never had to divert into Bonriki at night so we never relied on the standby lights and in any case without VASIS the airport was a health hazard. It would have been the classic black hole par excellence with unreliable battery lights and no VASIS with the final approaches to both ends of the runway over the Pacific ocean.
One day an Air Nauru pilot reported seeing a funny sort of VASIS with single red and white light source. There was no NOTAM about the new VASIS but that was ops normal for the Pacific islands anyway. He flew the VASIS and nearly ended up scraping the wheels of the 727 through the lagoon.
More reports came through of the Bonriki VASIS and all said it was set awfully low. Fortunately, Bonriki was a day light only airport. On investigation the VASIS looked rather like an old age British letter pillar or post box like the ones you see on street corners in the old day. . And it was painted bright bred too plus it had two light bulbs if I recall.
. Christ knows what the light angles were set at but my guess from previous experiences at calibrating VASIS in Australia, was around two degrees or less.
Air Nauru DCA contacted his counterpart at Tarawa (each was a one man band Directorate of Civil Aviation) and asked who had flight tested this red/white contraption and if so was it officially commissioned or merely "on test."
Back came the reply by telex - "Has not been commissioned but Air Pacific say it looks OK." Air Pacific operated a de Havilland Heron into Bonriki so a bloody reliable opinion that turned out to be!
Air Nauru immediately told its crews not to use the VASIS under any ccircumstances. A few months later the VASIS was loaded on to a battered old truck and left to rot in the cargo shed. Turned out it was a former New Zealand (?) primitive light source contraption used for crop-dusters. The Tarawa DCA guy had seen pictures of this thing in some aviation magazine and thought what a splended idea it would be to have one at Tarawa.
He bought one with government funds and it shipped up cheaply and stuck it into the ground, connected it to some batteries and hey presto! a real cheap aid (?) to visual navigation. Why worry about a NOTAM?
Couple of months afterwards a USA FAA airways inspector happended to pass through Bonriki and I showed him the sad looking bright red VASIS toppled into the spider infested corner of the cargo shed. He was speechless and said it was a priceless relic and bought it on the spot and had it shipped to a aviation museum in USA.
I have often wondered about the accuracy and reliability of the various PAPI/VASIS installed around contry aerodromes in Australia and funded by the local council. Are they flight tested regularly by qualified calibration personnel or do they rely purely on pilot reports if something doesn't look quite right. Remember the Air Pacific Heron pilot on the Bonriki "VASIS."..
Bit of thread creep there...
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Way, way, way up there
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Capt W;
A time to really know the required performance and how to twist/contort the head to see the runway.
Would you consider a left circuit to the west ?? I can't remember what obstacles are out that side other than the televisions..
Scaring the kids... Not at all
Well maybe a huge adrenaline rush, making the legs quiver a bit after one of those two candela strength runway light landings in the middle of no-where, no moon and rough as ##%! ........ . Is it that I know I should be scared out here 
Good words indeed Bushy.... be careful out there!!
More IF training? With currency then I guess so. I recall a CPL getting a NVFR who started to put me into a spiral dive in the circuit at a VERY dark Victorian town - YMMB is just not very dark at all for real night training. He wondered why I took over
Did his CPL IF training let him down or was it just him that night!!
So is it all training - great in theory. But what about the 'other' factors. Out flying the previous night into the wee small hours of the morning and haven't quite got a full sleep; it's hard to sleep in the middle of the day sometimes.. A bit hungry.. Noisy people down the back.. Surely these are also factors or does the pilots experience overcome these so they perform adequately.
when it's pouring rain rough as guts & viz is poor a R/H circuit in a B200 is just asking for it
Would you consider a left circuit to the west ?? I can't remember what obstacles are out that side other than the televisions..
Scaring the kids... Not at all
Well maybe a huge adrenaline rush, making the legs quiver a bit after one of those two candela strength runway light landings in the middle of no-where, no moon and rough as ##%! ........ . Is it that I know I should be scared out here Good words indeed Bushy.... be careful out there!!
More IF training? With currency then I guess so. I recall a CPL getting a NVFR who started to put me into a spiral dive in the circuit at a VERY dark Victorian town - YMMB is just not very dark at all for real night training. He wondered why I took over
Did his CPL IF training let him down or was it just him that night!!So is it all training - great in theory. But what about the 'other' factors. Out flying the previous night into the wee small hours of the morning and haven't quite got a full sleep; it's hard to sleep in the middle of the day sometimes.. A bit hungry.. Noisy people down the back.. Surely these are also factors or does the pilots experience overcome these so they perform adequately.
Merlins Magic wrote:
Being rather familiar (albeit in the now distant past) with night ops at TNK I would tend to feel that an advantage of landing on RWY 11 would be the lights of the town being clearly visible just past the upwind threshold which adds significant depth perception to the approach picture on final for that RWY. I would feel that PLovett is somewhat similarly conversant with that airport - with the added advantage of recency.
Centaurus, hardly thread drift. Please keep them coming!
Many years ago now I once was just departing YBAS NVFR one evening when as turning to set heading a small bat flew through the prop arc (probably dazzled by the landing light) and desintergrated across the entirety of my my single-engined aircraft windscreen. Reacting way too quickly to both the noise and the mess I hooked hard into a turn back toward the RWY complex. Of course it is rather dark out there to the south of Alice and because of my initial actions I ended-up with a bad case of the leans. I was surprised just how quickly these can develop and was lucky that I was able to gain visual reference quickly (through the goop) to return and land. That was a real eye-opener for me at least.
Regards,
OpsN.
Curious as to why you wouldn't take Rwy 07 with a Vasis even if it has 15 knots of X-wind instead of 11 and have no gs guidance.
Centaurus, hardly thread drift. Please keep them coming!
Many years ago now I once was just departing YBAS NVFR one evening when as turning to set heading a small bat flew through the prop arc (probably dazzled by the landing light) and desintergrated across the entirety of my my single-engined aircraft windscreen. Reacting way too quickly to both the noise and the mess I hooked hard into a turn back toward the RWY complex. Of course it is rather dark out there to the south of Alice and because of my initial actions I ended-up with a bad case of the leans. I was surprised just how quickly these can develop and was lucky that I was able to gain visual reference quickly (through the goop) to return and land. That was a real eye-opener for me at least.
Regards,
OpsN.
Last edited by OpsNormal; 27th Aug 2008 at 05:19.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 1,569
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C Whisperer there are no real reasons as to why one couldn't do a normal L/H circuit when operating on rwy 35 @ BDG it's certaintly not terrain it's the local rules & I guess the old 'fly neighbourly' principle but doing R/H one just can't see the rwy at all when past the ldg threshold in poor wx.
Oh I know the req performance of the old Beech I stick to the numbers like glue & to some degree local knowledge as in known land features etc (if you can see them). There's one single factor you cannot improve on & that's the human element of flying especially when doing a high worklaod arrival such as the topic here. Teach pilots all you like they/we still fly perfectly serviceable A/C into the ground oblivious to the fact 'till it's too late. Improving ground aids is the only way, now there's a challenge, get some of that money spent on security at these highly risky country airports (NOT) & spend it on making it safer to land in the first place, then lets worry about hijacking the A/C. Crash just short of the rwy & a hijcaking is purely academic hey?
CW
Oh I know the req performance of the old Beech I stick to the numbers like glue & to some degree local knowledge as in known land features etc (if you can see them). There's one single factor you cannot improve on & that's the human element of flying especially when doing a high worklaod arrival such as the topic here. Teach pilots all you like they/we still fly perfectly serviceable A/C into the ground oblivious to the fact 'till it's too late. Improving ground aids is the only way, now there's a challenge, get some of that money spent on security at these highly risky country airports (NOT) & spend it on making it safer to land in the first place, then lets worry about hijacking the A/C. Crash just short of the rwy & a hijcaking is purely academic hey?
CW
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Alice Springs
Posts: 1,744
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting nights
For many years I was puzzled by something that often went flashing past my aircraft as I was on final for runway 12 at Alice Springs at night. Most birds are too smart to fly at night.
i finally discovered that there are bat caves somewhere to the west of the airport. I never hit one, but I reckon I frightened a few, and they certainly got my attention.
SINGLE PILOT IFR IS DIFFERENT. I think some have forgotten.
I remember night takeoffs on Runway 12 at Alice springs. It was necessary to be flying by reference to instruments before the last runway light went past (nothing new about that), but after gear retraction nothing else got done until I was well above obstacles, and preferably flying over the town. Then the boost pumps etc got dealt with.
I was always led to believe that you were either flying visually, or on instruments. not a combination of both.
That's great theory.
However if you try to fly a purely visual circuit at an outback airstrip on a dark night with only kero flares (or worse still battery lights) there will be very little surface lighting, and altitude awareness will be gone. Instrument flying in the circuit is necessary. But visual observation and obstacle awareness is also necessary. Otherwise you are CFIT BAIT.
I remember going into Kintore at night . A right hand circuit was necessary, and so the lights were on the wrong side of the aeroplane. On base you could have a significant tailwind component, an invisible mountain in front,and the lighting out to your right.
No time to have your attention diverted by something inside.
It would be nice to have a second pair of eyes on those occasions.
But you don't.
i finally discovered that there are bat caves somewhere to the west of the airport. I never hit one, but I reckon I frightened a few, and they certainly got my attention.
SINGLE PILOT IFR IS DIFFERENT. I think some have forgotten.
I remember night takeoffs on Runway 12 at Alice springs. It was necessary to be flying by reference to instruments before the last runway light went past (nothing new about that), but after gear retraction nothing else got done until I was well above obstacles, and preferably flying over the town. Then the boost pumps etc got dealt with.
I was always led to believe that you were either flying visually, or on instruments. not a combination of both.
That's great theory.
However if you try to fly a purely visual circuit at an outback airstrip on a dark night with only kero flares (or worse still battery lights) there will be very little surface lighting, and altitude awareness will be gone. Instrument flying in the circuit is necessary. But visual observation and obstacle awareness is also necessary. Otherwise you are CFIT BAIT.
I remember going into Kintore at night . A right hand circuit was necessary, and so the lights were on the wrong side of the aeroplane. On base you could have a significant tailwind component, an invisible mountain in front,and the lighting out to your right.
No time to have your attention diverted by something inside.
It would be nice to have a second pair of eyes on those occasions.
But you don't.
Last edited by bushy; 27th Aug 2008 at 07:46.
Join Date: Oct 1998
Location: UK
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeez, dont know what all the hoo ha is about. Those blokes who frequented the Lae yacht club "back in the day" were pretty good at lining up the black holes. Most of the time they were so pissed a VASI wouldn't have been of much use.Just get on with it I reckon
Most birds are too smart to fly at night
I often hear Ibis fly over my house - cause they honk like a goose.
I try not to fly much at night - but the slight crease in the left wing leading edge of the FTDK is the result of what I believe to be a bird strike at night on base leg into Rwy 07 at YBTL. That takes you over the Townsville common which is serious migratory bird habitat. Could have been a bat I guess - but I don't think so.
Given the damage done to a B200 by an Ibis (photo posted here some time ago), I would hate to hit one of those suckers. The windscreen of the Bo might put up some resistance cause it's THICK - unlike the p*ss weak windscreens they put in 210's etc.
Dr
