Plane crash at Orange Airport
There's a few pilots out there that probably wish their Cirrus had had a tail wheel when they scraped the tail on the ground when they didn flare.
The Cirrus is one of the easiest aircraft to land at night.
The Cirrus is one of the easiest aircraft to land at night.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: Queensland
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Any night flying and the Night Visual Rating, should be done in a twin, with an instructor only and night circuits should be icus only.
Everyone is aware that night circuit training at a capital city airport,, shouldn't be done in a single,
as there's too much residential area around.
as there's too much residential area around.
Night flying on dark nights away from extensive ground lighting needs a properly equipped aircraft, sound instrument skills and a good knowledge of sensory illusions and how to deal with them, it doesn't need a twin engine aircraft.
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: 2,967
Received 92 Likes
on
53 Posts
Everyone is aware that night circuit training at a capital city airport,, shouldn't be done in a single,
as there's too much residential area around.
as there's too much residential area around.
Night flying on dark nights away from extensive ground lighting needs a properly equipped aircraft, sound instrument skills and a good knowledge of sensory illusions and how to deal with them, it doesn't need a twin engine aircraft.
The first job I ever had after gaining my CPL and a MECIR was a casual job, six days on and four off IIRC, based in the Moomba Oil and Gas fields, flying a C206. I was allowed (indeed encouraged) to do one hours night circuits every three tours.Taking off from RW 30 on a moonless night you were effectively IMC from passing the last runway lights until turning downwind.
I can still vividly recall the very first take off I did under those conditions.
I suspect that anyone reading this who has had the same experience will know exactly what went through my mind at the time!
It's all well and good to say that 'proper' operators and the airlines will use a sim for riskier operations, and that is a valid claim when a suitable simulator is available...Most times, for GA anyway, this is simply not the case. That is the unfortunate reality, whether or not it is liked.
If it is good enough for organisations like Qantas to prohibit a range of exercises at night, not limited to asymmetric, when an actual aircraft is used, ii's good enough for me.
In the case of major airlines, I know the record that resulted in the introduction of such restrictions, and all these aircraft were/are FAR 25 or equivalent aircraft, not FAR 23 or earlier CAR light aircraft standards.
So it should be very clear what I am saying, and I repeat, any candidate for any test, in an actual aircraft, who is invited to conduct asymmetric exercises at night should refuse.
The fact that accidents happen in daylight is irrelevant, and as for crash mentioned at Darwin, people should acquaint themselves with the detailed causes ---- indeed, I would go so far as to say it "was caused" by unnecessarily risky training demands by CASA. I have a strong suspicion that similar, but not identical demands played a dominant role in the Renmark loss. Our steady death toll on asymmetric training/checking in Australia speaks for itself.
It is a nonsense to suggest that the additional risks of carrying out such training at night is trivial, and should be ignored.
Tootle pip!!
PS: Gupta, I just mentioned two night asymmetric training accidents that came immediately to mind, but we are not short of night accidents in GA aircraft.
Last edited by LeadSled; 19th May 2018 at 05:37. Reason: PS: added
Thread Starter
Taking off from RW 30 on a moonless night you were effectively IMC from passing the last runway lights until turning downwind.
I can still vividly recall the very first take off I did under those conditions. I suspect that anyone reading this who has had the same experience will know exactly what went through my mind at the time!
I can still vividly recall the very first take off I did under those conditions.
I suspect that anyone reading this who has had the same experience will know exactly what went through my mind at the time!DF.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: (Not always) In front of my computer
Posts: 371
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I added a post mentioning this yesterday but removed due relevance. 61.395 (2) is for passenger carriage, not two crew dual training flights?
Yes Two Dogs but the original reference by KRA was a response to Thorn birds first mentioning of corporate jet jockey.
My post responded to that not this particular training incident.
However maybe Part 61.395 (2) might apply to the instructor. An instructor on here might enlighten us.
My post responded to that not this particular training incident.
However maybe Part 61.395 (2) might apply to the instructor. An instructor on here might enlighten us.
Last edited by On eyre; 19th May 2018 at 12:21.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Tasmania and High Wollemi
Posts: 439
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One out of hospital was last report. https://www.centralwesterndaily.com....r-plane-crash/
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NVFR Generally
guys. Apologies if this seems a stupid question but its something I’d like to get clarified. If we say that circuit training at night in a single under NVFR is an unacceptable risk, and this extends to doing this during a BFR, isn’t this a statement that single engine NVFR itself is an unacceptable risk and should not be undertaken (ie scrap the NVFR rating altogether and prohibit single engine ops to day VFR only)?
It seems to be that if recurrent training for a particular rating is too dangerous, doesn’t that make exercising the privileges of the rating also too dangerous? If recurrence training at night is stopped, but the NVFR is still available we are basically saying that once you have a NVFR you should never have your night flying reviewed or monitored? Doesn’t this make NVFR even more dangerous.
i want to be clear, I do not have the experience to give any informed view as to whether or not conducting recurrency training in a single at night is an unacceptable risk. However, if we accept that it is, doesn’t that make night flying in a single generally an unacceptable risk?
Denning
It seems to be that if recurrent training for a particular rating is too dangerous, doesn’t that make exercising the privileges of the rating also too dangerous? If recurrence training at night is stopped, but the NVFR is still available we are basically saying that once you have a NVFR you should never have your night flying reviewed or monitored? Doesn’t this make NVFR even more dangerous.
i want to be clear, I do not have the experience to give any informed view as to whether or not conducting recurrency training in a single at night is an unacceptable risk. However, if we accept that it is, doesn’t that make night flying in a single generally an unacceptable risk?
Denning
In the USA every PPL license allows you to fly overnight. There are actually very few countries that have a separate night VFR endorsement.
Statistically the USA has more night incidents than what we do in Australia but I believe this is because there are just so many aircraft over there by comparison and the fact that their weather conditions are more volatile and mountains much higher.
Statistically the USA has more night incidents than what we do in Australia but I believe this is because there are just so many aircraft over there by comparison and the fact that their weather conditions are more volatile and mountains much higher.
guys. Apologies if this seems a stupid question but its something I’d like to get clarified. If we say that circuit training at night in a single under NVFR is an unacceptable risk, and this extends to doing this during a BFR, isn’t this a statement that single engine NVFR itself is an unacceptable risk and should not be undertaken (ie scrap the NVFR rating altogether and prohibit single engine ops to day VFR only)?
It seems to be that if recurrent training for a particular rating is too dangerous, doesn’t that make exercising the privileges of the rating also too dangerous? If recurrence training at night is stopped, but the NVFR is still available we are basically saying that once you have a NVFR you should never have your night flying reviewed or monitored? Doesn’t this make NVFR even more dangerous.
i want to be clear, I do not have the experience to give any informed view as to whether or not conducting recurrency training in a single at night is an unacceptable risk. However, if we accept that it is, doesn’t that make night flying in a single generally an unacceptable risk?
Denning
It seems to be that if recurrent training for a particular rating is too dangerous, doesn’t that make exercising the privileges of the rating also too dangerous? If recurrence training at night is stopped, but the NVFR is still available we are basically saying that once you have a NVFR you should never have your night flying reviewed or monitored? Doesn’t this make NVFR even more dangerous.
i want to be clear, I do not have the experience to give any informed view as to whether or not conducting recurrency training in a single at night is an unacceptable risk. However, if we accept that it is, doesn’t that make night flying in a single generally an unacceptable risk?
Denning
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: London
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i absolutely agree with the above, however, my question is different. I suppose the question I’m asking is that if (for the sake of argument) one does hold the view that NVFR recurrence training or including it as part of BFR is a risk they would not be prepared to take (and a number of people in the posts above do seem to hold this view), isn’t that person also saying that any single engine NVFR flight is too dangerous? Otherwise, it would seem odd to say that conducting SE NVFR ops generally is ok, but there is some added element of risk when undertaking circuits at night with an instructor on board.
