How Do You Fly Night Circuits?
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: heathrow
How Do You Fly Night Circuits?
I noticed the post below on a forum about night flying. The wording of each paragraph has been changed so as not to infringe any copyright but the gist is the same.
The author is advocating never flying a 3 degree G/Ps at night seemingly based on the fact that if the engine stops on finals you will not be able to glide to the airfield.
I always understood that any licenced airfield had to have some form of angle of slope indication for night flying?
What slope angle do you use for a night approach and for what reason?
Are PAPI's 'The Devils Instument'?!
Do you fly circuits at night so you can always reach the runway in the event of an engine failure?
------------------------------------------------------------
Turning final two miles from the runway then you should still be at a thousand feet QFE.
Turning final about one mile from the threshold at about 500 ft QFE to conform to the normal circuit procedure.
If the airfield at which you learn has stupid NIMBY type bomber circuits then these figures may not be appropriate.
PAPIs are OK for multi engined aeroplanes but for flying an instrument approach in a single engine aircraft they are regrettably where you will end up.
For any visual approaches in a single engine aircraft they are the devils instrument.
Try flying a few circuits with the PAPI’s switched off.
At some stage you will fly to an airfield without PAPI’s at night and you should possess the necessary skill and judgement to be able to fly an approach without them.
The author is advocating never flying a 3 degree G/Ps at night seemingly based on the fact that if the engine stops on finals you will not be able to glide to the airfield.
I always understood that any licenced airfield had to have some form of angle of slope indication for night flying?
What slope angle do you use for a night approach and for what reason?
Are PAPI's 'The Devils Instument'?!
Do you fly circuits at night so you can always reach the runway in the event of an engine failure?
------------------------------------------------------------
Turning final two miles from the runway then you should still be at a thousand feet QFE.
Turning final about one mile from the threshold at about 500 ft QFE to conform to the normal circuit procedure.
If the airfield at which you learn has stupid NIMBY type bomber circuits then these figures may not be appropriate.
PAPIs are OK for multi engined aeroplanes but for flying an instrument approach in a single engine aircraft they are regrettably where you will end up.
For any visual approaches in a single engine aircraft they are the devils instrument.
Try flying a few circuits with the PAPI’s switched off.
At some stage you will fly to an airfield without PAPI’s at night and you should possess the necessary skill and judgement to be able to fly an approach without them.
Fly Conventional Gear
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 1,600
Likes: 0
From: Winchester
....It's never occured to me to fly night circuits in a different way to day circuits...although I can see the sense in always being able to make the runway. But if you are going to take that line then you'd never fly a 3 degree glideslope in a single ever, or leave the circuit at night at all.As far as PAPIs are concerned...well I've never really found the need for them during the day or night and I think night training should include landing without PAPIs.
Joined: Sep 2001
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 2,787
Likes: 208
From: Toronto
It depends on the airport
As you move from grass strips to lighted runways to runways served by an instrument procedure, the slopes of the obstacle free approach areas become less steep.
If you do all your night training at PAPI served runways and subsequently fly at night to a runway without one using the same approach slope you are used to, you might just hit something before reaching the runway.
Similarly a one in ten gradient may accommodate an engine failure privided there's no headwind -- not much room for error in your typical SEP.
Steeper approaches at night give you a better chance at missing the trees. I've yet to see a tree lit to ICAO standards
If you do all your night training at PAPI served runways and subsequently fly at night to a runway without one using the same approach slope you are used to, you might just hit something before reaching the runway.
Similarly a one in ten gradient may accommodate an engine failure privided there's no headwind -- not much room for error in your typical SEP.
Steeper approaches at night give you a better chance at missing the trees. I've yet to see a tree lit to ICAO standards
.
Joined: Sep 2004
Posts: 1,684
Likes: 3
From: Down at the sharp pointy end, where all the weather is made.
Steeper approaches at night give you a better chance at missing the trees. I've yet to see a tree lit to ICAO standards
Our aerodrome has a 4.5 deg glideslope to ensure obstacle clearance and the APAPIs are set for this. My 'normal' procedure is to fly the circuit as per during the day, but it is a rather special circumstance, being 750' QFE and having a 750M runway, with trees on the approach. You're pretty much limited to accurate flying of the standard cct & app. The aerodrome limits night flying to those with considerable experience and annual checkouts and a written list of those approved for night flying.
No, PAPIs or APAPIs are NOT instruments of the Devil! Ours are turned off during the day so that we can train people to use the proper runway aspect to guage their approach slope, but are an essential at night to guarantee missing those pesky trees on short final!
Engine failures at night in a single? Well, I don't think that it's any more likely on the approach than in the cruise, so the risk is no greater. The most likely time for an engine failure I believe is just after takeoff when it's flogging away at its hardest. If you check your fuel and do your power checks properly, then you're going to be REALLY unlucky to suffer. I can't recall a case of engine failure in a single at night except due to fuel starvation, so statistically from that regard it's safer flying at night than during the day!!!????
Cheers,
TheOddOne
Joined: Oct 2004
Posts: 1,199
Likes: 3
From: Hunched over a keyboard
The safest way to fly is by doing the same thing all the time - so that when the workload is high (night/poor wx) then you are operating in a way that is second nature.
Therefore, the safest way to fly a night circuit is the same way that you fly a day circuit, just in the dark! if the daytime techniques don't work once the sun has gone down then there is something wrong with the daytime technique. The last thing needed in a higher workload environment (night) is to do something that is not familiar, as this will crank up the workload still further and increase the risk of an error.
Therefore, the safest way to fly a night circuit is the same way that you fly a day circuit, just in the dark! if the daytime techniques don't work once the sun has gone down then there is something wrong with the daytime technique. The last thing needed in a higher workload environment (night) is to do something that is not familiar, as this will crank up the workload still further and increase the risk of an error.
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: heathrow
Steeper approaches at night give you a better chance at missing the trees. I've yet to see a tree lit to ICAO standards
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
From: Amsterdam
My instructor told me to flare once we had the runway illuminated by the landing light. On the second circuit, somewhere on downwind, the landing light broke. Fortunately we were flying a PA-28 with those low-power wingtip recognition lights fitted as well, and as soon as we saw the runway illumiated by those, we just both yanked the control column simultaneously, just enough to cushion the landing (arrival, actually) and save the plane.
Joined: Sep 2001
Aviation Qualifications: CPL
Posts: 2,787
Likes: 208
From: Toronto
Some of us find it easier to land without a landing light; however it is useful to let whoever is on the runway that you are about to use it.
As for animals, think deer in the headlights.
Landing lights do advertise your presence and once gave me sufficient warning to duck my head below the panel before hitting a bird
As for animals, think deer in the headlights.
Landing lights do advertise your presence and once gave me sufficient warning to duck my head below the panel before hitting a bird
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Iceland
I only follow the PAPI when following heavier aircraft on final (Small bizjets and up). Assuming that the plane ahead of me is flying 2 reds, 2 whites; I can stay at 3 white, 1 red (or 3 w and 1 pink ) and be absolutely postive that I will stay above the wake...
) and be absolutely postive that I will stay above the wake...
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: heathrow
I only follow the PAPI when following heavier aircraft on final (Small bizjets and up). Assuming that the plane ahead of me is flying 2 reds, 2 whites; I can stay at 3 white, 1 red (or 3 w and 1 pink ) and be absolutely postive that I will stay above the wake...
) and be absolutely postive that I will stay above the wake...
Joined: Jul 2003
Aviation Qualifications: PPL
Posts: 257
Likes: 0
From: Canada (Southeastern Québec)
My instructor told me to flare once we had the runway illuminated by the landing light. On the second circuit, somewhere on downwind, the landing light broke. Fortunately we were flying a PA-28 with those low-power wingtip recognition lights fitted as well, and as soon as we saw the runway illumiated by those, we just both yanked the control column simultaneously, just enough to cushion the landing (arrival, actually) and save the plane.
Some of us find it easier to land without a landing light; however it is useful to let whoever is on the runway that you are about to use it.
As for animals, think deer in the headlights.
Landing lights do advertise your presence and once gave me sufficient warning to duck my head below the panel before hitting a bird
As for animals, think deer in the headlights.
Landing lights do advertise your presence and once gave me sufficient warning to duck my head below the panel before hitting a bird
In any event landing lights can and do fail. Every 6 months I do 5 or 6 night circuits to keep in shape if I haven't done much night flying lately, and I always make sure I do one approach without landing light. My Beech has a single 250 watt light in the wing and it's much more effective than the little candle behind the prop on my previous PA28, so I miss it more when it isn't working.
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
Assuming that the plane ahead of me is flying 2 reds, 2 whites; I can stay at 3 white, 1 red (or 3 w and 1 pink ) and be absolutely postive that I will stay above the wake
) and be absolutely postive that I will stay above the wake
I find night circuits are best flown like day circuits: accurately by the numbers w.r.t. altitude and position. However, while in the daytime I would fly a steep final (because it's much easier than a 3 deg slope, and much safer, with more options) at night I would follow the lights.
However I rarely fly at night enroute - it leaves no escape route for an engine failure.
Thread Starter
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 990
Likes: 0
From: heathrow
Some tips from the CAA Safety Sense Leaflet
• Wake vortices are generally invisible.
• Vortices last longer in calm or light wind conditions and are therefore at their most hazardous then.
• They are most dangerous close to the ground.
• The heavier an aircraft, and the slower it is flying, the stronger its vortex and the greater the risk to following aircraft.
• The lighter the aircraft you are flying, the more vulnerable it is.
• When an aeroplane’s nosewheel is on the ground, there are no vortices.
• On departure, use the appropriate time interval when following a heavier aircraft –
2 minutes if starting the take-off at the same point,
3 minutes if taking off part-way along the same runway.
• When taking off behind a departing heavier aircraft, note its rotation point so that you can lift- off before that point and climb above the vortex. If you cannot – WAIT.
• On the approach, avoid vortices by flying above and upwind of the lead aircraft’s flightpath.
• When following a heavier aircraft which has already landed, note its touchdown point and land beyond it. If there isn’t room – GO AROUND.
• Apply the spacing advised by ATC, using runway length as a guide to judging distance.
• When following a large helicopter consider allowing a bigger gap than for the equivalent sized aeroplane.
• Keep well away from helicopters with rotors turning, they may be hovering or hover taxiing – it can be difficult to judge.
• If in doubt – WAIT.
• All encounters should be reported.
Full details are published in AIC 17/1999 (Pink 188), ‘Wake Turbulence’
• Wake vortices are generally invisible.
• Vortices last longer in calm or light wind conditions and are therefore at their most hazardous then.
• They are most dangerous close to the ground.
• The heavier an aircraft, and the slower it is flying, the stronger its vortex and the greater the risk to following aircraft.
• The lighter the aircraft you are flying, the more vulnerable it is.
• When an aeroplane’s nosewheel is on the ground, there are no vortices.
• On departure, use the appropriate time interval when following a heavier aircraft –
2 minutes if starting the take-off at the same point,
3 minutes if taking off part-way along the same runway.
• When taking off behind a departing heavier aircraft, note its rotation point so that you can lift- off before that point and climb above the vortex. If you cannot – WAIT.
• On the approach, avoid vortices by flying above and upwind of the lead aircraft’s flightpath.
• When following a heavier aircraft which has already landed, note its touchdown point and land beyond it. If there isn’t room – GO AROUND.
• Apply the spacing advised by ATC, using runway length as a guide to judging distance.
• When following a large helicopter consider allowing a bigger gap than for the equivalent sized aeroplane.
• Keep well away from helicopters with rotors turning, they may be hovering or hover taxiing – it can be difficult to judge.
• If in doubt – WAIT.
• All encounters should be reported.
Full details are published in AIC 17/1999 (Pink 188), ‘Wake Turbulence’
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
From: EuroGA.org
GTE
I did a quick google on
wake vortex descent rate
and found a few hits; one is an IEEE paper which needs a login (no idea how google has managed to index it) and there are others.
Wiki has a figure for you.
I did a quick google on
wake vortex descent rate
and found a few hits; one is an IEEE paper which needs a login (no idea how google has managed to index it) and there are others.
Wiki has a figure for you.
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 4,598
Likes: 0
From: Amsterdam
no idea how google has managed to index it
Still leaves me wondering why the IEEE would be interested in wake vortices though. Can't see the relation with those and electric and electronic engineers.
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
From: Iceland
My AIP recommends flying above the aircraft ahead and touching down further down the runway. So I prefer flying 3 or 4 whites following heavier airplane espesially when ATC squeezes me in between traffic.