Night vision goggles?
I have not tried - fortunately I have no access to any.
I think the narrow field of view is the problem. There are many cheaper ways of edge lighting some sort of flarepath.
Interesting to hear what someone with military experience says.
I think the narrow field of view is the problem. There are many cheaper ways of edge lighting some sort of flarepath.
Interesting to hear what someone with military experience says.
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: Uk
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Night vision goggles?
An interesting idea. Not impossible but lack of peripheral vision which gives you that 'natural feeling' of the ground coming up to meet you and the cues of when to flare will be gone.
Ideally you'd need a raldalt and accurate groundspeed with a co-pilot reading out heights and speed as you descend. This is how it's done in the military with helicopters, run on speed of up to 30kts.
Ideally you'd need a raldalt and accurate groundspeed with a co-pilot reading out heights and speed as you descend. This is how it's done in the military with helicopters, run on speed of up to 30kts.
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 461
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure someone must have tried it somewhere.
However having flown on them for a considerable period whilst in the military myself. Due to all the possible illusions and as said before narrow field of view. I would say that for someone who is untrained in their use to attempt it in a light aircraft would be on an unlit strip would be almost suicidal.
However having flown on them for a considerable period whilst in the military myself. Due to all the possible illusions and as said before narrow field of view. I would say that for someone who is untrained in their use to attempt it in a light aircraft would be on an unlit strip would be almost suicidal.
I was at Oskosh a couple of year ago. Someone was selling a thermal infrared system linked to a HUD. Designed more for big singles and up. There was a demo video of an aircraft operating at an airport with no lights, also has the advantage of being able to see through some cloud. Disadvantage is that (I suspect) it only works on tarmac runways where the temperature differential between the strip and surroundings is significant. The demo video was done in Alaska with snow on the ground probably for the same reasons.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Under the clag EGKA
Posts: 1,026
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was taken for a drive in France where we both wore nvg. Invigorating to say the least. I wouldn't want to land anything in them. The view was very restricted and depth perception very distorted. I had a sense of things being distant even when they weren't. I know that this can be trained out but?
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: The World
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NVGs require quite some training, as they tend to fairly obscure 3d vision capability. I prefer natural vision, good NVFR training, all lights in cockpit early off and guts feeling - works better for me.
Join Date: Jan 1999
Location: north of barlu
Posts: 6,207
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
YES
With a little help from friends in the military we did try the NVG's one night, as said depth perception and perifferal vision are the key issues and some training would be required to fly safely.
Moderator
Night vision and thermal infra red are two very different systems. As I use my aircraft for search for the local Fire Department, I have equipped one with both. Each in their own way, they are good for detecting and differentiating things you're looking for, but once you've found them, those systems become less important.
I could not use either system to safely land my aircraft. I know that there are military and "high end" civil versions of both which offer greater capability, but you won't find those around GA aircraft.
If you have need of either system while airborne, they each offer useful capability, but beware: Neither allow you to distinguish colour of an object (like nav lights), both have the potential to miss something, though used in combination they should not. Both draw to user into unawares of their environment (not looking for traffic, flying into cloud/fog, forgetting cockpit scan). The lower resolution versions, particularly the hand helds are nearly useless from a plane, and for the hand held thermal units, outside North America, you'll find that the scan rate available is 9 frames per second, which is too slow to be useful tracking anything. The night vision units I have used have been real time. If they have any magnification, they will be of no use from a plane due to shake.
Of the two, I find the thermal more useful, and more likely to get me close to the runway (or whatever else I'm looking for), and it is reassuring to look down my runway, and believe that there is no wildlife on in, which is a regular concern for me.
That said, and particular for the hand held units, do not go and spend that money thinking that you can safely expand the capability of a GA aircraft, you really cannot. They are a nice toy, an good for searching from altitude, but put them/it away once you approach the circuit.
I could not use either system to safely land my aircraft. I know that there are military and "high end" civil versions of both which offer greater capability, but you won't find those around GA aircraft.
If you have need of either system while airborne, they each offer useful capability, but beware: Neither allow you to distinguish colour of an object (like nav lights), both have the potential to miss something, though used in combination they should not. Both draw to user into unawares of their environment (not looking for traffic, flying into cloud/fog, forgetting cockpit scan). The lower resolution versions, particularly the hand helds are nearly useless from a plane, and for the hand held thermal units, outside North America, you'll find that the scan rate available is 9 frames per second, which is too slow to be useful tracking anything. The night vision units I have used have been real time. If they have any magnification, they will be of no use from a plane due to shake.
Of the two, I find the thermal more useful, and more likely to get me close to the runway (or whatever else I'm looking for), and it is reassuring to look down my runway, and believe that there is no wildlife on in, which is a regular concern for me.
That said, and particular for the hand held units, do not go and spend that money thinking that you can safely expand the capability of a GA aircraft, you really cannot. They are a nice toy, an good for searching from altitude, but put them/it away once you approach the circuit.
