CAA eases night flying restrictions
Thread Starter
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: NE England
Age: 53
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CAA eases night flying restrictions
CAA eases night flying restrictions | CAA Newsroom | About the CAA
Only just glanced through this but it appears that night flight is now either VFR or IFR. However, if I enter IMC in CAS (I have an IMCR), then presumably, I now request IFR clearance into a zone. (unless it is eg. CI CTR, then presumably, I still need to request SVFR?).
Still find it bizarre that a PPL can go flying at night below a solid OVC layer, no ground lights etc with no instrument flying training at all!
Only just glanced through this but it appears that night flight is now either VFR or IFR. However, if I enter IMC in CAS (I have an IMCR), then presumably, I now request IFR clearance into a zone. (unless it is eg. CI CTR, then presumably, I still need to request SVFR?).
Still find it bizarre that a PPL can go flying at night below a solid OVC layer, no ground lights etc with no instrument flying training at all!
Last edited by VMC-on-top; 18th May 2012 at 14:23.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 23, Railway Cuttings, East Cheam
Age: 68
Posts: 3,115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think it's one of those cases of use your loaf. If you have a night qual but no IMCr then you would be a clown to go flying on a marginal night, even if it was within the letter of the law. Much like the IMCr really. I wouldn't take off without a cloudbase of less than a thousand feet, even though I can.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: 18nm NE grice 28ft up
Posts: 1,129
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are IMC inside/outside CAS day or night you are IFR.
IIRC there was a little instrument refresher training during the NQ or night rating as it was then. That was to top up on the 3 hours in the PPL at that time.
D.O.
IIRC there was a little instrument refresher training during the NQ or night rating as it was then. That was to top up on the 3 hours in the PPL at that time.
D.O.
Last edited by dont overfil; 18th May 2012 at 15:07.
Nothing to do with easing restrictions; they have changed the rules because of a conflict of EASA rules and National rules that actually made Night Flying illegal without an instrument qualification! A simple, but rather late application of common sense.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.... and made it MORE restrictive - not an easement in sight.
You now need a ceiling of 1500ft, and for IMC/IR holders the minimum heights and minimum visibility have also increased.
The latter is probably a bit acedemic, but the 1500ft ceiling now prohibits, for example, circuit training in perfectly flyable nights.
I could not care less whether it is called Night VFR or IFR. But this is yet another restriction, and with SERA (Single European Rules of the Air) I suspect more are coming - one I know of is a minimum height of 500ft above ground or water. That won't help us instructing and maintaining the PFL skills...
You now need a ceiling of 1500ft, and for IMC/IR holders the minimum heights and minimum visibility have also increased.
The latter is probably a bit acedemic, but the 1500ft ceiling now prohibits, for example, circuit training in perfectly flyable nights.
I could not care less whether it is called Night VFR or IFR. But this is yet another restriction, and with SERA (Single European Rules of the Air) I suspect more are coming - one I know of is a minimum height of 500ft above ground or water. That won't help us instructing and maintaining the PFL skills...
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just how do you measure the cloud base accurately at most GA airfields ?
I can't see CCT training being restricted at night unless the cloud base is at or below the CCT height simply because it is a restriction that is so hard to measure.
I can't see CCT training being restricted at night unless the cloud base is at or below the CCT height simply because it is a restriction that is so hard to measure.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fuji,
Re 1000ft minimum altitude at night - I also think this is reasonable; hence I called the visibility and height limit changes academic. Low visibility combined with night makes for problematic IFR conditions, let alone VFR!
The ceiling change is what annoys me.
A and C,
Biggin Hill, Southend, Lydd (all used for night training) have ATIS, and use ceilometers. Hence the decision whether to fly a VFR circuit is as black-and-white as flying a CAT I ILS with less than 550m RVR. Illegal and reportable.
Re 1000ft minimum altitude at night - I also think this is reasonable; hence I called the visibility and height limit changes academic. Low visibility combined with night makes for problematic IFR conditions, let alone VFR!
The ceiling change is what annoys me.
A and C,
Biggin Hill, Southend, Lydd (all used for night training) have ATIS, and use ceilometers. Hence the decision whether to fly a VFR circuit is as black-and-white as flying a CAT I ILS with less than 550m RVR. Illegal and reportable.
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Banished (twice) to the pointless forest
Posts: 1,558
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So.... will my NPPL become a Day & Night LAPL when the paper shuffle is complete?
(Pulls pin, throws, and ducks for cover as Beagle reaches for his keyboard.)
(Pulls pin, throws, and ducks for cover as Beagle reaches for his keyboard.)
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: LKBU
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When getting my night rating, I was strongly advised to keep at least 2000 ft AGL while enroute at night, and not below grid MORA, if one is published. Circuit practice is a different matter, but I don't think insisting on a 1500 ft cloud base for night VFR is unreasonable.
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The ceiling change is what annoys me.
Like it or not, VFR will always be more restrictive than IFR as you need to maintain VFR...
Last edited by soaringhigh650; 20th May 2012 at 00:35.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: 75N 16E
Age: 54
Posts: 4,729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The military have been flying VFR at night for years, if you read official documents 
Anyway this is great news for FAA licence holders without an IR, as it means that they can now fly at night with no ambiguity as to whether it is allowed or not.
Anyway this is great news for FAA licence holders without an IR, as it means that they can now fly at night with no ambiguity as to whether it is allowed or not.
The NPPL will remain regulated by the ANO; it will not include a night qualification and the minimum day VFR visibility for SSEA operation remains at 5 km.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Soaringhigh650
So go and fly IFR instead.
Like it or not, VFR will always be more restrictive than IFR as you need to maintain VFR...
Like it or not, VFR will always be more restrictive than IFR as you need to maintain VFR...
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: London
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are several mistakes in EASA Part FCL (for example the CPL multi time requirement for a SE CPL, inconsistencies in CRI and CRE privileges, or IREs needing an IRI rating even if they have an FI rating), but this is deliberate because the EASA people have a different view of what IFR means.
In their minds, a flight under IFR is always receiving an ATC service, and following some sort of IFR flight plan. No service/clearance --> you can't be IFR.
Hence when they prohibit IFR, they suspect they mean to prohibit flying under an IFR clearance (whether in IMC or VMC).
From a UK perspective, this view is completely misguided. It is still the law... hence the change to allow VFR at night so non-IR/IMC holders can still fly at night.
In their minds, a flight under IFR is always receiving an ATC service, and following some sort of IFR flight plan. No service/clearance --> you can't be IFR.
Hence when they prohibit IFR, they suspect they mean to prohibit flying under an IFR clearance (whether in IMC or VMC).
From a UK perspective, this view is completely misguided. It is still the law... hence the change to allow VFR at night so non-IR/IMC holders can still fly at night.
Last edited by Cobalt; 20th May 2012 at 11:59.
In their minds, a flight under IFR is always receiving an ATC service, and following some sort of IFR flight plan. No service/clearance --> you can't be IFR.
Hence when they prohibit IFR, they suspect they mean to prohibit flying under an IFR clearance (whether in IMC or VMC).
From a UK perspective, this view is completely misguided. It is still the law... hence the change to allow VFR at night so non-IR/IMC holders can still fly at night.
Hence when they prohibit IFR, they suspect they mean to prohibit flying under an IFR clearance (whether in IMC or VMC).
From a UK perspective, this view is completely misguided. It is still the law... hence the change to allow VFR at night so non-IR/IMC holders can still fly at night.
The idea that pilots with no instrument training can fly at night in conditions where they self-separate, do not enter cloud and maintain a minimum in flight visibility looks remarkably like "VFR" to me. It it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: USA
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The idea that pilots with no instrument training can fly at night in
conditions where they self-separate, do not enter cloud and maintain a minimum in flight visibility looks remarkably like "VFR" to me. It it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
conditions where they self-separate, do not enter cloud and maintain a minimum in flight visibility looks remarkably like "VFR" to me. It it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
