Night Ops - Is there a better way??
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Australia
Posts: 325
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry Lofty...your on your own.
Mate.....
Sorry but you are out of touch with modern Technology, FRMS's, NVG's, Auto Hover, and perhaps a heap of others....
And mate Charities are not Charities in Aviation....their a guise for making money!!!....and do a dam good job.
Red.
Sorry but you are out of touch with modern Technology, FRMS's, NVG's, Auto Hover, and perhaps a heap of others....
And mate Charities are not Charities in Aviation....their a guise for making money!!!....and do a dam good job.
Red.
Lofty - if that really is your first post - welcome to Pprune!
I too am keen to see your NVG experience (and on what sort of NVG) that leads you to so categorically reject them.
Whilst I agree with some of your points , I find the sentiment of others (such as the NVG one) quite disagreeable. To stop outlandings or night winches reduces the ability of the helicopter to save lives. These manoeuvres can be accomplished with a high degree of safety - despite your personal reluctance. I also assume that you refuse to do them given your assesment of their safety? Or is that the organisation you worked for were unable to provide the high training levels required to make it a safe (in your opinion) operation?
And if it really is the black hole thing that you are concerned abouy - why not try NVG so you can SEE on the way down????
And what about the Canadians mentioned above by heedm, overwater night winching without autopilots/etc? How about the RAAF who used to do it in UH-1s? Because you personally find it a danger, should we restrict those with the resources to train and safely perform the operation when it is justified?
PS Red Wine - I plan to be at the May night conference - will I be drinking with you again?
I too am keen to see your NVG experience (and on what sort of NVG) that leads you to so categorically reject them.
Whilst I agree with some of your points , I find the sentiment of others (such as the NVG one) quite disagreeable. To stop outlandings or night winches reduces the ability of the helicopter to save lives. These manoeuvres can be accomplished with a high degree of safety - despite your personal reluctance. I also assume that you refuse to do them given your assesment of their safety? Or is that the organisation you worked for were unable to provide the high training levels required to make it a safe (in your opinion) operation?
And if it really is the black hole thing that you are concerned abouy - why not try NVG so you can SEE on the way down????
And what about the Canadians mentioned above by heedm, overwater night winching without autopilots/etc? How about the RAAF who used to do it in UH-1s? Because you personally find it a danger, should we restrict those with the resources to train and safely perform the operation when it is justified?
PS Red Wine - I plan to be at the May night conference - will I be drinking with you again?
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,574
Received 422 Likes
on
222 Posts
The mainstay of the UK's SAR cover in the 60/ 70's was the Whirlwind. The old Whirly had no AP, not even a stick trim. Winching was a bit of fun, in manual throttle too. Seemed to work alright back then but time has moved on. SAR is probably the most demanding role anywhere. To be safe and effective, the best equipment, the best training, the best crews and the best system and organisation are needed. The problem comes when you try to hide a weakness or deficiency behind a strength, or even worse a perceived strength, somewhere else in the equation..
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: The Dark Side
Posts: 483
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lofty2004 you really are out of it - time to stop playing with your cyclic, kick back and retire. Re charities - I work for one of the more prominent ones and I have NEVER been put under any sort of pressure by ANY member of management to do a job against my better judgement. In fact I am more likely to be questioned as to whether the job should proceed.
Robsrich - if singles are deemed to be capable of doing some of the EMS work then the A119 should be considered as the baseline.
Robsrich - if singles are deemed to be capable of doing some of the EMS work then the A119 should be considered as the baseline.
Thread Starter
Eagle 86
Thanks I have noted your comments. You guys are really bringing out some interesting points. Personally, I have taught NVIS/NVG and they are great. But you must have good training, supervision and currency. Anyone else wish to comment?
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Oz
Posts: 36
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quite right. It's something that seems to get forgotten when any discussion about civil use of NVG comes up, particularly with CASA. It's not easy and does require training but I don't think anyone is advocating the use of NVG in the same way as the military does. It should be used as a safety aid not a tactical aid. It used to be regarded as dangerous to go flying in the dark, or low flying, or in clouds and if you go back far enough it used to regarded as dangerous to go flying! We have developed training to learn how to cope with all of these situations and the regulators rules to ensure safe operations. The same can be done for this and the longer the regulators leave their heads in the sand the longer it will take to make any progress. I've obviously got it wrong but I always thought that they were there to help the industry progress not hinder it!!
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: World Wide
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeah guys... NVGs may be very nice BUT how do we get the Govts and various contracting customers to realise that first one has to walk and that means using the correctly equipped machines (IE IFR capable, stable, Medium Twins) AND Instrument training ...when this is a minimum requirement for EMS/ Rescue tasks THEN we can do the NVG thing with crews that would be ready to cope with the disciplines required.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spent a couple of years in BASI and then the ATSB and had the opportunity to review and do some investigations involving helicopters at night.
The one thing that struck me was that often, the organisations did not fully comprehend what they were trying to acheive. They weren't clear about what they wanted, then fund, equip or train their people to do what they were doing. There often weren't strong supervisory aspects and much of the operations seemed like a good idea at the time without much appreciation in depth of the hazards the organisation or crews were facing. Rarely was there any true intent to do things less than the best way...more of not knowing what they didn't know.
Unfortunately, the result is often felt by the crew doing a mission or worse still, the patient. The industry really needs to establish universal minimum standards. No point waiting for CASA because it is under numerous pressures from different quarters. Is this something HAA should lead?
Just some thoughts.
The one thing that struck me was that often, the organisations did not fully comprehend what they were trying to acheive. They weren't clear about what they wanted, then fund, equip or train their people to do what they were doing. There often weren't strong supervisory aspects and much of the operations seemed like a good idea at the time without much appreciation in depth of the hazards the organisation or crews were facing. Rarely was there any true intent to do things less than the best way...more of not knowing what they didn't know.
Unfortunately, the result is often felt by the crew doing a mission or worse still, the patient. The industry really needs to establish universal minimum standards. No point waiting for CASA because it is under numerous pressures from different quarters. Is this something HAA should lead?
Just some thoughts.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: AB, Canada
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In a sense I'd like to agree with Lofty.
I posted previously talking more about completing night overwater ops safely using technique, training, and technology. Of course, "safely" is relative and in truth danger continues to exist. This is where I begin to agree with Lofty. If I had a wish list, it wouldn't include wishing that I get sent out to do some of these missions, thinking only of myself.
However, I'm not entirely selfish. I like rescuing people. I like living in a country where people are prepared to accept some danger to help others in distress. I even enjoy some of the riskier missions due to the challenge and personal pride of successfully completing same.
I also have limitations, a family of my own, and a desire to continue living. I can't and won't complete every mission. Some people that need the service will die if situations aren't ideal. Maybe new technology will reduce that number, but will never eliminate it.
To balance all of this with what Lofty said, I think the starting point should not be "what equipment do we need?". The starting point should be "Which missions should we be able to complete?". Once that question is answered, then you must fit your machine and crews with what is required, as has been discussed. If you can convince your country that losing the victims that can't last through the night is acceptable, when you consider the cost of properly equipping the machines and the risk to the operators, then don't provide any rescue service at all. Like what Lofty said.
Matthew.
I posted previously talking more about completing night overwater ops safely using technique, training, and technology. Of course, "safely" is relative and in truth danger continues to exist. This is where I begin to agree with Lofty. If I had a wish list, it wouldn't include wishing that I get sent out to do some of these missions, thinking only of myself.
However, I'm not entirely selfish. I like rescuing people. I like living in a country where people are prepared to accept some danger to help others in distress. I even enjoy some of the riskier missions due to the challenge and personal pride of successfully completing same.
I also have limitations, a family of my own, and a desire to continue living. I can't and won't complete every mission. Some people that need the service will die if situations aren't ideal. Maybe new technology will reduce that number, but will never eliminate it.
To balance all of this with what Lofty said, I think the starting point should not be "what equipment do we need?". The starting point should be "Which missions should we be able to complete?". Once that question is answered, then you must fit your machine and crews with what is required, as has been discussed. If you can convince your country that losing the victims that can't last through the night is acceptable, when you consider the cost of properly equipping the machines and the risk to the operators, then don't provide any rescue service at all. Like what Lofty said.
Matthew.
Well said heedm.
Where is that masked man (Lofty)?
Oggs: The HAA night conference in May will attempt to do just that - to set minimum standards for helicopter NVFR that are acceptable to a larger part of the Oz/NZ industry. The biggest question will be wether to have a simple standard for all to follow (ie tighten up the Oz/NZ regs) or set a minimum standard that requires operators to buy into on thier own initiative dependant upon their own mission needs/funding levels. Be there or be square!!
Where is that masked man (Lofty)?
Oggs: The HAA night conference in May will attempt to do just that - to set minimum standards for helicopter NVFR that are acceptable to a larger part of the Oz/NZ industry. The biggest question will be wether to have a simple standard for all to follow (ie tighten up the Oz/NZ regs) or set a minimum standard that requires operators to buy into on thier own initiative dependant upon their own mission needs/funding levels. Be there or be square!!
Last edited by helmet fire; 23rd Apr 2004 at 06:06.
Thread Starter
An update on Australasian thinking
I have posted a recent HAA PR to Flight International. Although it is a bit long for this thread, it may help us focus. Once again your comments are really appreciated. We need your feedback to help our night guys. (We have about fifty attending so far.)
Press release for Flight International – HAA Industry Conference 17-21 May 2004
The Helicopter Association of Australasia has become concerned about the run of night accidents since 2000. HAA President Rob Rich told Flight International’s Emma Kelly four helicopters had crashed at night since 2000 causing the loss of eight lives. Three survivors were injured. Considering the low number of hours flown at night, by the 38 SAR/EMS operators in Australia and another 12 in New Zealand, the trend was alarming.
Rich also said his association’s review of UK and US night accidents confirmed that something was very wrong in the helicopter industry. The US loss rate was showing a marked increase, according to HAA researchers. As a result a HAA Night Operations Conference was held at Newcastle, NSW in November 2003. The meeting had a sombre tone as many attendees were still grieving the loss friends in the two Queensland accidents.
The HAA used four case studies for discussion. The most recent accident involved a Bell 407 which had departed Mackay for Hamilton Island, Queensland to collect a patient. Shortly after departure, when over water, the helicopter was observed by radar to make erratic turns and then plunge into the ocean. The pilot and two crewmen were killed.
An even more serious accident occurred several years ago when a Bell 206 was returning to Rockhampton from a remote cattle station with child patient and his mother. The helicopter ran low on fuel and diverted to the nearest town. Unfortunately, the area had become fog bound and the medical helicopter ran out of fuel and crashed killing the pilot, two crewmen the patient and his mother.
About a year later, a Bell 407 from the same base was called to rescue some yachtsmen who had run aground on a reef 125 nm off the coast. Whilst attempting to drop a life raft, the machine hit the water. Fortunately the pilot and crewman were not seriously injured. An IFR Bell 412 arrived from Brisbane soon after and seeing that all survivors were not in danger, waited until dawn to winch them to safety. An odd outcome of this flight was the yachtsmen were later arrested for attempting to smuggle a large quantity of drugs into Australia on the damaged yacht.
Across the Tasman Sea, a New Zealand female pilot was outbound from Masterton in a BK 117 to collect a patient when she encountered poor weather conditions near rugged terrain. Whilst trying to navigate her way along a familiar day route on the GPS, which took her through a valley, the GPS indicated they were off track. She made an emergency climb to reach a safe altitude. However, when almost clear of the highest terrain, the BK 117 hit a tree and was severely damaged. The tree penetrated the cockpit and injured the pilot. The undercarriage was all but ripped off and the tail fins were damaged. The pilot managed to regain control and limped back to base. Fire crews had to cut away the skids and the helicopter was landed on a pile of old tyres.
When asked by Flight International if there was a common factor, Rich said: “Yes, the common factor is that all these flights were operating under night visual rules.” Australia has comprehensive night visual regulations which may need adjusting after the HAA consolidates the input from their members. New Zealand like many other counties does not have specific night visual rules and relies on the operator’s operations manual and training system for risk management.
President, Rob Rich emphasised that night IFR operators seemed to have less of a problem than the lesser equipped and trained night visual only operators. We seem to have forgotten the lesson the UK and US learned several decades ago - night visual only capable helicopters must be crewed by pilots who are IFR trained and current, either by simulated IFR conditions or in a suitable simulator. Night visual flight in marginal weather or over areas with few lights such as water or the Australian outback is really an IFR operation. These conditions can place a terrible load on a crew who may not be IFR trained or IFR current, especially if the helicopter only has the basic instruments for flight at night.
The attendees at the Newcastle conference decided to meet again in 2004 to continue the discussion on night operations and propose industry standards for the regulators, i.e. the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand. Further, delegates wanted to raise other operational and safety issues concerning day emergency service operations, such as the number of hoist cable failures and fire fighting issues.
As a result the HAA is hosting the HAA Industry Conference at the Nara Sea World Resort, Queensland from 17-21st May 2004. Rich said the interest is very strong and if the quality of speakers is the same as the Newcastle conference then we will achieve a great deal for our industry. Monday and Tuesday are for night operations, Wednesday and Thursday cater for SAR/EMS/Police/Customs/Fire fighting people and Friday is the first HAA tourist conference. This segment of the industry has had avoidable losses also, according to Rich.
In reply to Flight International’s question about CASA and CAA NZ involvement, Rich said “The New Zealand and Australian regulators are attending as observers. The regulators have to face two problem areas; firstly, the identification of the shortcomings of night visual emergency operations and the development of joint HAA/regulator education programmes to stop operators going beyond the capabilities of their crews and equipment; and secondly, the introduction of night vision devices and all that goes with this monumental step forward in capability.
In conclusion, Rob told Emma the introduction of the night vision devices such as NVG is being held up by the lack of suitable legislation, especially in Australia. The CAA NZ is less concerned in this regard as they place more responsibility on the operators and several are already using the devices. CASA, however, does not have the resources both in manpower or experience to draft legislation needed under the Australian Civil Aviation Act. The only solution is for the HAA and CASA to form a joint writing team and get the project underway as soon as possible. Night vision devices such as NVG are a safer way into the future!
Press release for Flight International – HAA Industry Conference 17-21 May 2004
The Helicopter Association of Australasia has become concerned about the run of night accidents since 2000. HAA President Rob Rich told Flight International’s Emma Kelly four helicopters had crashed at night since 2000 causing the loss of eight lives. Three survivors were injured. Considering the low number of hours flown at night, by the 38 SAR/EMS operators in Australia and another 12 in New Zealand, the trend was alarming.
Rich also said his association’s review of UK and US night accidents confirmed that something was very wrong in the helicopter industry. The US loss rate was showing a marked increase, according to HAA researchers. As a result a HAA Night Operations Conference was held at Newcastle, NSW in November 2003. The meeting had a sombre tone as many attendees were still grieving the loss friends in the two Queensland accidents.
The HAA used four case studies for discussion. The most recent accident involved a Bell 407 which had departed Mackay for Hamilton Island, Queensland to collect a patient. Shortly after departure, when over water, the helicopter was observed by radar to make erratic turns and then plunge into the ocean. The pilot and two crewmen were killed.
An even more serious accident occurred several years ago when a Bell 206 was returning to Rockhampton from a remote cattle station with child patient and his mother. The helicopter ran low on fuel and diverted to the nearest town. Unfortunately, the area had become fog bound and the medical helicopter ran out of fuel and crashed killing the pilot, two crewmen the patient and his mother.
About a year later, a Bell 407 from the same base was called to rescue some yachtsmen who had run aground on a reef 125 nm off the coast. Whilst attempting to drop a life raft, the machine hit the water. Fortunately the pilot and crewman were not seriously injured. An IFR Bell 412 arrived from Brisbane soon after and seeing that all survivors were not in danger, waited until dawn to winch them to safety. An odd outcome of this flight was the yachtsmen were later arrested for attempting to smuggle a large quantity of drugs into Australia on the damaged yacht.
Across the Tasman Sea, a New Zealand female pilot was outbound from Masterton in a BK 117 to collect a patient when she encountered poor weather conditions near rugged terrain. Whilst trying to navigate her way along a familiar day route on the GPS, which took her through a valley, the GPS indicated they were off track. She made an emergency climb to reach a safe altitude. However, when almost clear of the highest terrain, the BK 117 hit a tree and was severely damaged. The tree penetrated the cockpit and injured the pilot. The undercarriage was all but ripped off and the tail fins were damaged. The pilot managed to regain control and limped back to base. Fire crews had to cut away the skids and the helicopter was landed on a pile of old tyres.
When asked by Flight International if there was a common factor, Rich said: “Yes, the common factor is that all these flights were operating under night visual rules.” Australia has comprehensive night visual regulations which may need adjusting after the HAA consolidates the input from their members. New Zealand like many other counties does not have specific night visual rules and relies on the operator’s operations manual and training system for risk management.
President, Rob Rich emphasised that night IFR operators seemed to have less of a problem than the lesser equipped and trained night visual only operators. We seem to have forgotten the lesson the UK and US learned several decades ago - night visual only capable helicopters must be crewed by pilots who are IFR trained and current, either by simulated IFR conditions or in a suitable simulator. Night visual flight in marginal weather or over areas with few lights such as water or the Australian outback is really an IFR operation. These conditions can place a terrible load on a crew who may not be IFR trained or IFR current, especially if the helicopter only has the basic instruments for flight at night.
The attendees at the Newcastle conference decided to meet again in 2004 to continue the discussion on night operations and propose industry standards for the regulators, i.e. the Australian Civil Aviation Safety Authority and the Civil Aviation Authority of New Zealand. Further, delegates wanted to raise other operational and safety issues concerning day emergency service operations, such as the number of hoist cable failures and fire fighting issues.
As a result the HAA is hosting the HAA Industry Conference at the Nara Sea World Resort, Queensland from 17-21st May 2004. Rich said the interest is very strong and if the quality of speakers is the same as the Newcastle conference then we will achieve a great deal for our industry. Monday and Tuesday are for night operations, Wednesday and Thursday cater for SAR/EMS/Police/Customs/Fire fighting people and Friday is the first HAA tourist conference. This segment of the industry has had avoidable losses also, according to Rich.
In reply to Flight International’s question about CASA and CAA NZ involvement, Rich said “The New Zealand and Australian regulators are attending as observers. The regulators have to face two problem areas; firstly, the identification of the shortcomings of night visual emergency operations and the development of joint HAA/regulator education programmes to stop operators going beyond the capabilities of their crews and equipment; and secondly, the introduction of night vision devices and all that goes with this monumental step forward in capability.
In conclusion, Rob told Emma the introduction of the night vision devices such as NVG is being held up by the lack of suitable legislation, especially in Australia. The CAA NZ is less concerned in this regard as they place more responsibility on the operators and several are already using the devices. CASA, however, does not have the resources both in manpower or experience to draft legislation needed under the Australian Civil Aviation Act. The only solution is for the HAA and CASA to form a joint writing team and get the project underway as soon as possible. Night vision devices such as NVG are a safer way into the future!
Thread Starter
FINAL THOUGHTS ON NIGHT OPERATIONS
On behalf of the Helicopter Association of Australasia and those working with us to make night operations safer, I would like to thank you all helping us to find a better way to do things.
I really appreciate your comments and the effort you have made in replying to this thread. I will collate your replies and present them in an Annex to the Conference Papers which will be handed out to all delegates, (about 70+) as they arrive and also emailed out on Tue 11 May '04 to those on our HAA and Conference lists.
Should you have any more thoughts or want to add something to your comments, then we can accept your input until 0500Z (GMT) on Tue 11 May.
As mentioned previously, we are having our 2004 HAA Industry Conference at the Nara Sea World Resort, Gold Coast, Australia from 17-21 May '04. The first two days are for night operations where we are hoping to tidy up the discussions launched in Nov '03.
More info: www.haa.net.au
Should anyone need a copy of the Post Conference Report please leave your details at: [email protected]
It would be a good idea to leave a snail mail address as the Report maybe too big for email. Also we will have papers handed out by speakers. (The HAA will cover the cost of printing and airmail postage as a service to our industry.)
In conclusion, let us not forget those who have been killed or injured trying to help others at night. Hopefully, our gathering will find better ways to establish "Industry Best Practice."
If we can save one night accident in the future, then you have all done your best!
Regards,
Rob Rich
President
Helicopter Association of Australasia
www.haa.net.au
Email: [email protected]
I really appreciate your comments and the effort you have made in replying to this thread. I will collate your replies and present them in an Annex to the Conference Papers which will be handed out to all delegates, (about 70+) as they arrive and also emailed out on Tue 11 May '04 to those on our HAA and Conference lists.
Should you have any more thoughts or want to add something to your comments, then we can accept your input until 0500Z (GMT) on Tue 11 May.
As mentioned previously, we are having our 2004 HAA Industry Conference at the Nara Sea World Resort, Gold Coast, Australia from 17-21 May '04. The first two days are for night operations where we are hoping to tidy up the discussions launched in Nov '03.
More info: www.haa.net.au
Should anyone need a copy of the Post Conference Report please leave your details at: [email protected]
It would be a good idea to leave a snail mail address as the Report maybe too big for email. Also we will have papers handed out by speakers. (The HAA will cover the cost of printing and airmail postage as a service to our industry.)
In conclusion, let us not forget those who have been killed or injured trying to help others at night. Hopefully, our gathering will find better ways to establish "Industry Best Practice."
If we can save one night accident in the future, then you have all done your best!
Regards,
Rob Rich
President
Helicopter Association of Australasia
www.haa.net.au
Email: [email protected]
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Gold Coast, Queensland
Posts: 943
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Rob
The conference sounds a good idea and hopefully will provide some sound results.
Having said that, I think the cost, especially for non members is very high and will prevent individuals from coming. No doubt some companies will pay up but casual rescue pilots like me can't afford those costs.
The conference sounds a good idea and hopefully will provide some sound results.
Having said that, I think the cost, especially for non members is very high and will prevent individuals from coming. No doubt some companies will pay up but casual rescue pilots like me can't afford those costs.
Thread Starter
Nigel - please call
Thanks for your feedback. You can join as an associate non-voting for only $49.50. Maybe you can sing for your supper? Call Rob 0415 641 774.
Thread Starter
HAA Conference Great Success
A big thanks to the 100 plus delegates and observers who attended the 2004 HAA Industry Conference at Sea World Nara Resort on the Gold Coast, Queensland Australia, from 17-21 May '04.
Besides the programmed events, some hardware was on display. The GeoSim Simulator, a NVG cockpit lighting display simulator, NVG ANVIS 9 and a Leo III FLIR were available.
First night NAS (Airspace) people tossed out some snacks and heavy drinks to get us talking about the new aerodrome procedures. These are the outside controlled airspace stuff. They got some really good feedback from the heli-drivers.
Matt Attwood from the USA stole the show with his presentation on NVIS ops and training and writing workable rules. About a dozen US EMS operators are using NVG and about another 30 are waiting paperwork or devices. So the new NVIS stuff is getting closer.
The post conference reports will be available in about a week and the offer still stands if you want to get a free copy. I have already received about fifty requests from my previous posting. Need a copy? Let us know on email: [email protected]
I missed the delegates Wednesday recon mission along the line nearby of bars. Some of those stories being told took a long time because some didn’t get to bed until 3:00AM. Well done.
But there were still smiles next day (and red eyes).
I will put some summarized session reports on this thread as the sub-committee guys get their notes finalised.
To those who presented and ran the workshops we owe you a great deal.
Thanks again,
Rob Rich
President
HAA
www.haa.net.au
[email protected]
For a copy of conference notes, etc.
Email above should read :
[email protected]
Ooops
Rob
Besides the programmed events, some hardware was on display. The GeoSim Simulator, a NVG cockpit lighting display simulator, NVG ANVIS 9 and a Leo III FLIR were available.
First night NAS (Airspace) people tossed out some snacks and heavy drinks to get us talking about the new aerodrome procedures. These are the outside controlled airspace stuff. They got some really good feedback from the heli-drivers.
Matt Attwood from the USA stole the show with his presentation on NVIS ops and training and writing workable rules. About a dozen US EMS operators are using NVG and about another 30 are waiting paperwork or devices. So the new NVIS stuff is getting closer.
The post conference reports will be available in about a week and the offer still stands if you want to get a free copy. I have already received about fifty requests from my previous posting. Need a copy? Let us know on email: [email protected]
I missed the delegates Wednesday recon mission along the line nearby of bars. Some of those stories being told took a long time because some didn’t get to bed until 3:00AM. Well done.
But there were still smiles next day (and red eyes).
I will put some summarized session reports on this thread as the sub-committee guys get their notes finalised.
To those who presented and ran the workshops we owe you a great deal.
Thanks again,
Rob Rich
President
HAA
www.haa.net.au
[email protected]
For a copy of conference notes, etc.
Email above should read :
[email protected]
Ooops
Rob
