Flight review for the night rating
Interesting times under Part 61.
Be careful with your night VFR though, there is also a requirement for a night currency check if you haven't flown at night for 6 months. This requirement cannot be satisfied by you doing some solo circuits, it is a flight instructor or nothing. I raised this issue with CASA and was given the ridiculous reply that getting a night check was easy and a good idea.
Stooged totally by Part 61
Interesting times indeed and a ripoff. I also need to do a ME flight review which was never needed. (I am not current on IFR rating)
Be careful with your night VFR though, there is also a requirement for a night currency check if you haven't flown at night for 6 months.
Be careful with your night VFR though, there is also a requirement for a night currency check if you haven't flown at night for 6 months.
Once this night IFR flight has been done, I would now meet the 6 month requirement to exercise the privileges of my NVFR rating.
Not if some clown of an FOI decides that IFR flights do not count.
This is not an entirely facetious comment, when NVFR was invented by DCA, I was "advised" by DCA that the fact that I had an instrument rating (a rare thing in GA then) didn't count, I still had to do a separate NVFR course and check.
I don't know if it has been mentioned elsewhere in this thread, but a US PPL automatically includes night flying, those "stoopid yanks" think aircraft and pilots should be able to fly H24 in the normal course of events, not as some special big deal. Until about the mid-1960s VFR at night was completely prohibited in Australia, which didn't inhibit VFR at night more than marginally, "west of the hills". Ag pilots in particular liked to get a "full day" in.
Tootle pip!!
I don't think they would be able to interpret the rules to preclude a night IFR flight from counting towards recency for night VFR flight.
The rules make it clear that you need to have done a night flight (for I think 1 hour) in the previous 6 months to be current to exercise the privileges of your NVFR rating. The recency requirement does not differentiate whether the flight needs to be done under VFR or IFR.
As ambiguous as the rules are, I think they would have a hard time trying to ping you on this one.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: sydney
Posts: 1,469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When one compares all the "recencies" required under Australian reg's compared with
the USA it is surprising that its not raining aluminium over there.
In the US more than 80% of private pilots hold instrument ratings, compared with very
few here. Cost of obtaining and the myriad of recency requirements to remain "current",
puts a damper on obtaining one.
I have heard of many high end GA corporate pilots who occasionally have to rent the cheapest
aircraft they can find to complete the 3 circuits required. Also many GA charter operators
who have had to forgo work because one of their crew are out of night currency.
I cannot see the point of a pilot who operates a global or equivalent, hoping in a C150
for a few night circuits.
the USA it is surprising that its not raining aluminium over there.
In the US more than 80% of private pilots hold instrument ratings, compared with very
few here. Cost of obtaining and the myriad of recency requirements to remain "current",
puts a damper on obtaining one.
I have heard of many high end GA corporate pilots who occasionally have to rent the cheapest
aircraft they can find to complete the 3 circuits required. Also many GA charter operators
who have had to forgo work because one of their crew are out of night currency.
I cannot see the point of a pilot who operates a global or equivalent, hoping in a C150
for a few night circuits.
Used to be, to be able to exercise a NVFR the requirement to be current . A 1 hour flight or 100nm per year. 3 takeoffs and landings in the 3 months prior if you want to take passengers. Don't know if that still the case. Lead Sled is correct that the US makes no distinction between day or night flight under VFR. Shouldn't be here too, but some training is required especially takeoffs at dark strips with no ground lights. I don't get these tossas that view NVFR as too dangerous and should be full on IFR for night flight. Hell I have been all over the bush at night and in most cases night flight is easier than day. The town lights stand out for miles whereas in the day the town has to be near under you before you see it. I recall many years ago having an difference of opinion with a chief pilot of a commuter airline in NSW (remember them) who had all these young single pilot flown10 seat aircraft running around in icing and other poor weather and thought nothing of it. NVFR in a 4 seat private aircraft however was not on.Now I ask you what is more dangerous? For starters the NVFR pilot won't be out there in those conditions as the weather criteria won't allow it. He has no commercial pressure to get the job done on time. Is flying generally a simpler aircraft,and doesn't have 9 passengers reliant on him if it does turn sh#t.
There is no statistics to my knowledge that shows NVFR flight have more accidents than day VFR. Probably (and my guess) that most pilots don't get the NVFR rating until they have a few hours under their belts.
There is no statistics to my knowledge that shows NVFR flight have more accidents than day VFR. Probably (and my guess) that most pilots don't get the NVFR rating until they have a few hours under their belts.
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,976
Received 104 Likes
on
59 Posts
I sometimes wonder if all of these increasingly restrictive (and idiotic
) regulations are being drafted by Lawyers with zero flying hours and an even less knowledge of Aviation itself. Let alone GA!
Suspect that Sunfish could enlighten us on that.
) regulations are being drafted by Lawyers with zero flying hours and an even less knowledge of Aviation itself. Let alone GA!Suspect that Sunfish could enlighten us on that.
Pinky,
The short answer is yes, all done by Office of Parliamentary Counsel. Directed, often, by CASA persons with little more experience, often none in recent years, including some with NIL civil experience.
Mike,
I admire your confidence, I am still having arguments about how many flight reviews I have to do, and on the latest "interpretations", looks like "CASA" is asking for a separate NVFR review for each type or category. Which I simply cannot afford, either time or money.
Tootle pip!!
PS: A question for some of you, how does the aeroplane know it is flying IFR or NVFR, and therefor know when to have an engine failure??
The short answer is yes, all done by Office of Parliamentary Counsel. Directed, often, by CASA persons with little more experience, often none in recent years, including some with NIL civil experience.
Mike,
I admire your confidence, I am still having arguments about how many flight reviews I have to do, and on the latest "interpretations", looks like "CASA" is asking for a separate NVFR review for each type or category. Which I simply cannot afford, either time or money.
Tootle pip!!
PS: A question for some of you, how does the aeroplane know it is flying IFR or NVFR, and therefor know when to have an engine failure??
Man Bilong Balus long PNG
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Looking forward to returning to Japan soon but in the meantime continuing the never ending search for a bad bottle of Red!
Age: 69
Posts: 2,976
Received 104 Likes
on
59 Posts
on the latest "interpretations", looks like "CASA" is asking for a separate NVFR review for each type or category
And they must be stopped from doing so!
While reading a recent ATSB report, I was surprised at the number of checks this senior helicopter pilot had to undertake:
The training and checking pilot held a Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)-issued Part 61 Air Transport Pilot Licence – Helicopter (ATPL(H)) and an Air Transport Pilot Licence - Aeroplane. Relevant checks recorded in his company recency record indicated for helicopters:
The training and checking pilot held a Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA)-issued Part 61 Air Transport Pilot Licence – Helicopter (ATPL(H)) and an Air Transport Pilot Licence - Aeroplane. Relevant checks recorded in his company recency record indicated for helicopters:
- an instrument proficiency check on 7 June 2017
- a low-level flight review on 14 October 2016
- an instructor rating on 24 May 2016
- a flight examiner rating on 8 June 2017
- a multi-engine helicopter flight review and EC135 biennial flight review on 27 October 2016
- a base check on an EC135 on 17 March 2017
- simulator training H135 on 17 March 2017
- CAO 20.11 training on EC135 on 17 July 2017
- a line check on 5 April 2017
- a night VFR review on 24 May 2016
- Class 1 pilot medical, valid to 2 October 2018.
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Goolwa
Age: 59
Posts: 124
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think in the deep dark past what is now a NVFR rating was called an instrument rating class 3 or 4? Having both a NVFR rating and IR, I think some people confuse the two. A NVFR is exactly that, a VISUAL rating for night, i.e. if you can't see a horizon or clearly defined areas of light then you are not flying visually. If you want to take off from a strip in the middle of a dark area with no visual reference then you need an Instrument Rating.
n regards to checks, the current system makes sense if you understand that it is about ticking boxes to avoid litigation. In some ways it is like a spiral dive, because some pilots did not take responsibility for their own actions and paid the price, the Regulator feels the need to regulate the circumstance by creating a box to tick. Thus there is a reduction in personal responsibility which leads to more boxes to tick. In the end we are not concerned with what is the responsible thing to do but what boxes must we tick and GA is a smoking hole in the ground.
n regards to checks, the current system makes sense if you understand that it is about ticking boxes to avoid litigation. In some ways it is like a spiral dive, because some pilots did not take responsibility for their own actions and paid the price, the Regulator feels the need to regulate the circumstance by creating a box to tick. Thus there is a reduction in personal responsibility which leads to more boxes to tick. In the end we are not concerned with what is the responsible thing to do but what boxes must we tick and GA is a smoking hole in the ground.
Correct, used to be known as a Class 4 instrument rating. Then around 1980 (give or take a year or so) the name changed to NVFR. The reason given was that it was not an instrument rating as there were no instrument approaches involved, flying in cloud enroute etc. The wx criteria was higher than day VFR 8km vis opposed to 5km by day. More stringent alternate requirements etc. And of course observing lowest safe 10nm either side of track. The rating took about 10 hours to complete. About 5 hours circuits with landing light off and two navs at night after that dual. Instrument training under the hood was included or could be on a simulator if the school had one.I wish I kept my old orange bound VFG as a historical reference but haven't seen it for decades.
May I make this remark about taking off at remote airstrips at night from someone who has done heaps of them (was trained in the bush as opposed to the city)there is nothing to fear so long as you stay current and observe this rule. The instant you rotate on takeoff and lose the runway lights (or flares ) you are on the clocks. Don't even think about looking outside, but maintain a positive rate of climb and steady heading,wings level to 500 ft. Then a simple rate 1 turn onto crosswind where you can then look briefly sideways to see the runway below and the brain confirms all is well. We are talking about 2 minutes flight time that's it. On a really dark night climb well above LSAFE in the circuit if you feel the need. Town and homestead lights will soon appear everywhere. I think the problem with learning at a city airport is even at night the city carpet of lights outside doesn't really give you any real night experiance and instructors really need to get their students well away from it. Many do ofcourse,some don't.
I can't recall many NVFR pilots at all crashing due night flying but can recall quite a few day VFR pilots crashing due running out of daylight. Maybe the yanks have got it right. Maybe VFR is just that day or night and night circuits at least should be part of the PPL. Who would have thought ?
May I make this remark about taking off at remote airstrips at night from someone who has done heaps of them (was trained in the bush as opposed to the city)there is nothing to fear so long as you stay current and observe this rule. The instant you rotate on takeoff and lose the runway lights (or flares ) you are on the clocks. Don't even think about looking outside, but maintain a positive rate of climb and steady heading,wings level to 500 ft. Then a simple rate 1 turn onto crosswind where you can then look briefly sideways to see the runway below and the brain confirms all is well. We are talking about 2 minutes flight time that's it. On a really dark night climb well above LSAFE in the circuit if you feel the need. Town and homestead lights will soon appear everywhere. I think the problem with learning at a city airport is even at night the city carpet of lights outside doesn't really give you any real night experiance and instructors really need to get their students well away from it. Many do ofcourse,some don't.
I can't recall many NVFR pilots at all crashing due night flying but can recall quite a few day VFR pilots crashing due running out of daylight. Maybe the yanks have got it right. Maybe VFR is just that day or night and night circuits at least should be part of the PPL. Who would have thought ?
When I informed the then CEO that my last AFR was a little over $500 and this one in the Post 61 era was over $3,500 and still not finished, he refused to believe me. Day VFR ME Flight Review to CPL MOS standard, followed by another in the Night VFR to the CPL MOS standard and a single engine AFR for good measure. He then remarked that I must be a lot safer now, I said not really as I taught the Instructor who was carrying out my AFR how to fly!
