Night Vision Goggles (NVG discussions merged)
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shy Torque,
Agree entirely. Inadvertant IMC in police ops, has happened and will again.
Nick,
I agree that NVG are a very useful tool. The panel mounted FLIR is not a pilots tool to fly the aircraft, it's for the front obsrever to find, follow and lead the ground troops to the "up to no gooders". It can see in great detail from well above 500 ft agl, 1000 - 1500 usually, and when used with the slaved nitesun the observer can see in very great detail. I still see no reason for a pilot to get involved to the degree that his eyes are on goggles deeply involved in the task. Obviously the pilot is involved but as in all cases be it on task or whatever, fly the aircraft. Being on goggles when things on task are getting very involved will more than often always draw the pilots attention to the operation on the ground, outside of the aircraft and its position in space, and the surrounding weather conditions. As I've said earlier, let the rear observer use NVGs, he's in the position to do so.
I'm not against the use of NVGs, but trying to get reasoned debate on the need and more importantly the use of them. There's no single reasoned argument for them to be used by the pilot from what has been said so far. Dare I say that most of the push for them comes from ex military pilots who used them very well in thier former careers. That's not a reason to fly on them on police operations.
Agree entirely. Inadvertant IMC in police ops, has happened and will again.
Nick,
I agree that NVG are a very useful tool. The panel mounted FLIR is not a pilots tool to fly the aircraft, it's for the front obsrever to find, follow and lead the ground troops to the "up to no gooders". It can see in great detail from well above 500 ft agl, 1000 - 1500 usually, and when used with the slaved nitesun the observer can see in very great detail. I still see no reason for a pilot to get involved to the degree that his eyes are on goggles deeply involved in the task. Obviously the pilot is involved but as in all cases be it on task or whatever, fly the aircraft. Being on goggles when things on task are getting very involved will more than often always draw the pilots attention to the operation on the ground, outside of the aircraft and its position in space, and the surrounding weather conditions. As I've said earlier, let the rear observer use NVGs, he's in the position to do so.
I'm not against the use of NVGs, but trying to get reasoned debate on the need and more importantly the use of them. There's no single reasoned argument for them to be used by the pilot from what has been said so far. Dare I say that most of the push for them comes from ex military pilots who used them very well in thier former careers. That's not a reason to fly on them on police operations.
Kalif:
Why do you insist on the rear seat obs wearing NVG - to what end?
How many police units do you know that slave their nightsun to their camera?????
I'm disappointed you can't see the common thread running through this topic regarding the main reason and benefits for NVIS - it's been made abundantly clear on several ocassions that it is an aid to flight safety. And it will be purchased and practiced as an aid to flight safety. There are spin offs with NVG:
1. Job denials would drop because the pilot could continue with an otherwise borderline flight (due to his concern for unknown weather ahead). The police stats would therefore improve.
2. Using NVG with nightsun, greatly enhances search and locate probabilities - even in the urban areas. Stats improve.
NVIS is a well tried and tested piece of kit. For many operators it has become a 'go/no go' item because of its phenomenal effectiveness. The yanks and europeans have been using NVIS for 15 years+. We will look back in 5 years time and joke about how fickle all the arguments were against NVIS. ALL future police helos will be fitted for but not with NVIS and many operators will equip their cabs with NVG.
For us in particular where 90% of the terrain is dark black with shadows
and cumulo granite dotted everywhere - it'll not be a day too soon.
You obviously know all about us Kalif - you'd have to concur then, wouldn't you?
Why do you insist on the rear seat obs wearing NVG - to what end?
How many police units do you know that slave their nightsun to their camera?????
I'm disappointed you can't see the common thread running through this topic regarding the main reason and benefits for NVIS - it's been made abundantly clear on several ocassions that it is an aid to flight safety. And it will be purchased and practiced as an aid to flight safety. There are spin offs with NVG:
1. Job denials would drop because the pilot could continue with an otherwise borderline flight (due to his concern for unknown weather ahead). The police stats would therefore improve.
2. Using NVG with nightsun, greatly enhances search and locate probabilities - even in the urban areas. Stats improve.
NVIS is a well tried and tested piece of kit. For many operators it has become a 'go/no go' item because of its phenomenal effectiveness. The yanks and europeans have been using NVIS for 15 years+. We will look back in 5 years time and joke about how fickle all the arguments were against NVIS. ALL future police helos will be fitted for but not with NVIS and many operators will equip their cabs with NVG.
For us in particular where 90% of the terrain is dark black with shadows
and cumulo granite dotted everywhere - it'll not be a day too soon.You obviously know all about us Kalif - you'd have to concur then, wouldn't you?
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kalif,
You sound like the guy who said, "Drowning isn't so bad, it's just water."
The "reasoned debate on the need and more importantly the use of them" is simple. Without them, you can't see squat. With them, you can see in the dark, and that makes you safer. Sorry I wasn't so clear in the first post.
We have blundered anong without such devices for decades, now we don't have to.
You sound like the guy who said, "Drowning isn't so bad, it's just water."
The "reasoned debate on the need and more importantly the use of them" is simple. Without them, you can't see squat. With them, you can see in the dark, and that makes you safer. Sorry I wasn't so clear in the first post.
We have blundered anong without such devices for decades, now we don't have to.
Kalif: I agree with TC - there is a clear and common reason for the use of NVG: flight safety. And that has been stressed throughout the replies.
I also question your statement re NVG for the backseaters. Again I would ask: who should be the priority for having the ground visual? Surely the pilot first? Why then would control of the nitesun be primarily in the hands of the pilots?
TC: I would add: 3. that jobs could also be continued into unknown or hilly terrain (wx allowing) because you could see the terrain, thus improving stats, and
4. SAR at night would be greatly simplified and more effective as any light source can be seen for 10s of miles (terrain allowing).
Nick brought up a point that we have had no end of problems trying to convey in Oz: flight profiles. Military flight profiles are so removed from either police or EMS mission profiles as to be irrelevant. For example, the reason the military have two pilots is profile driven, not an NVG requirement. But tooling around at 500 ft or so and then conducting a pad recce before landing is not a military profile, and can be safely achieved with only 5 hours of NVG training, single pilot. The US have proved it.
Shy Torque said:
I disagree entirely. Wires are our biggest killer, and they kill during the day: ie you cannot see them during the day either. How do we combat that? By a thorough wire recce, the identification of poles, roads, lights, etc. NVG allow you to do this recce during the night which is a TOTAL improvement over the nitesun. We just conduct a pad recce same as day which is impossible with a nitesun: thus NVGs should be the ONLY way we can conduct ad-hoc outlandings at night, and I am confident that in 5 to 10 years legislation will require the NVGs for such ops because the technology is so superior to nitesun.
I also question your statement re NVG for the backseaters. Again I would ask: who should be the priority for having the ground visual? Surely the pilot first? Why then would control of the nitesun be primarily in the hands of the pilots?
TC: I would add: 3. that jobs could also be continued into unknown or hilly terrain (wx allowing) because you could see the terrain, thus improving stats, and
4. SAR at night would be greatly simplified and more effective as any light source can be seen for 10s of miles (terrain allowing).
Nick brought up a point that we have had no end of problems trying to convey in Oz: flight profiles. Military flight profiles are so removed from either police or EMS mission profiles as to be irrelevant. For example, the reason the military have two pilots is profile driven, not an NVG requirement. But tooling around at 500 ft or so and then conducting a pad recce before landing is not a military profile, and can be safely achieved with only 5 hours of NVG training, single pilot. The US have proved it.
Shy Torque said:
NVGs are NOT good for ad-hoc landings due to the inability to see wires.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Helmetfire,
I stick by my statement that NVGs do NOT allow you to see wires. I agree that the risk can be minimised by a recce, looking for poles etc. but it still isn't certain that you will see the actual wires.
I stick by my statement that NVGs do NOT allow you to see wires. I agree that the risk can be minimised by a recce, looking for poles etc. but it still isn't certain that you will see the actual wires.
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: USA
Age: 75
Posts: 3,012
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shytorque,
Yep, wires are not always visible! But in the dark without NVG, you can't see wires, or dirt, or trees or houses, or anything. So the message is "You can't see wires with NVG, so don't get overconfident!" An IR spotlight on approach makes wires look like downtown Tokyo. You are still safer with NVG than without.
Yep, wires are not always visible! But in the dark without NVG, you can't see wires, or dirt, or trees or houses, or anything. So the message is "You can't see wires with NVG, so don't get overconfident!" An IR spotlight on approach makes wires look like downtown Tokyo. You are still safer with NVG than without.
Apache for HEMS - Strafe those Survivors!
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 120
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I spent 10 years in a previous life flying SAR, all of that time for overland ops NVG was our prime night flying aid. We all also held full procedural instrument ratings. Once you have night flown with NVG the shock of doing without them is substantial, they are a huge aid to flight safety and general situational awareness.
While it is difficult to spot wires on NVG it is not impossible using a sensible mix of ambient/cultural light and aircraft lights. It is certainly possible to pick out poles and pylons with relative ease, especially as your nav is likely to be more accurate and maps should key you into the presence of larger wires.
One point which no-one has mentioned, NVG into hilly terrain requires a good deal of instrument proficiency as the scan requires you to look below the goggles to keep a check on attitude, airspeed, altitude etc. So good IF skills certainly help.
You can usually see weather coming, either directly or by picture degradation, certainly more so than without goggles.
IR rated pilots certainly practice more than once a year, unless OPC(I) every six months are optional for some! The CAA require 3 IFR approaches within the last 90 days for recency and the company I work for requires much more than that.
Given the choice...., I would have both, as both considerably aid safety and I think the IR skills are complementary to the skills required for NVG ops. Night flight without NVG, major emergency, chances of safe off-piste landing? ( It happens, and so does inadvertant IMC, as the accident statistics will testify). Hopefully the authority will see the sense in moving positively in this direction in the near future.
While it is difficult to spot wires on NVG it is not impossible using a sensible mix of ambient/cultural light and aircraft lights. It is certainly possible to pick out poles and pylons with relative ease, especially as your nav is likely to be more accurate and maps should key you into the presence of larger wires.
One point which no-one has mentioned, NVG into hilly terrain requires a good deal of instrument proficiency as the scan requires you to look below the goggles to keep a check on attitude, airspeed, altitude etc. So good IF skills certainly help.
You can usually see weather coming, either directly or by picture degradation, certainly more so than without goggles.
IR rated pilots certainly practice more than once a year, unless OPC(I) every six months are optional for some! The CAA require 3 IFR approaches within the last 90 days for recency and the company I work for requires much more than that.
Given the choice...., I would have both, as both considerably aid safety and I think the IR skills are complementary to the skills required for NVG ops. Night flight without NVG, major emergency, chances of safe off-piste landing? ( It happens, and so does inadvertant IMC, as the accident statistics will testify). Hopefully the authority will see the sense in moving positively in this direction in the near future.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Nick,
I totally agree, I spent a few years instructing pilots to use them with and without the use of an IR searchlight. Your military colleagues were good enough to allow me to fly on them while air to air refuelling a Blackhawk lights out from a C130, too.
They DO have some limitations, wires is the main one.
At the moment the UK CAA remain very cautious about the use of NVGs and the thought of ad hoc night landings fills them with horror. The full package needs to be addressed properly and I think unfortunately we are still some way away from that.
Wires! Yes, potential killers day or night. Had a very severe fright myself in hazy conditions, flew over one set over a lake and spotted another set a few feet directly above us, only just visible. Wires incorrectly printed on chart. Lost 3 RAF colleagues and friends in a wires accident in Rhodesia (Puma). Lost an instructor mate to wires in Australia (Chinook). Lost best mate I ever had to wires following engine failure in a military sep fixed wing. Watched as a Blackhawk on NVGs hovering 50 metres away from my aircraft hit a whip aerial and wire on a ship whilst fast roping. Frightening stuff, thankfully they all escaped and the flying debris missed us. Sikorsky make strong blades but the tips are definitely frangible!
I totally agree, I spent a few years instructing pilots to use them with and without the use of an IR searchlight. Your military colleagues were good enough to allow me to fly on them while air to air refuelling a Blackhawk lights out from a C130, too.
They DO have some limitations, wires is the main one.
At the moment the UK CAA remain very cautious about the use of NVGs and the thought of ad hoc night landings fills them with horror. The full package needs to be addressed properly and I think unfortunately we are still some way away from that.
Wires! Yes, potential killers day or night. Had a very severe fright myself in hazy conditions, flew over one set over a lake and spotted another set a few feet directly above us, only just visible. Wires incorrectly printed on chart. Lost 3 RAF colleagues and friends in a wires accident in Rhodesia (Puma). Lost an instructor mate to wires in Australia (Chinook). Lost best mate I ever had to wires following engine failure in a military sep fixed wing. Watched as a Blackhawk on NVGs hovering 50 metres away from my aircraft hit a whip aerial and wire on a ship whilst fast roping. Frightening stuff, thankfully they all escaped and the flying debris missed us. Sikorsky make strong blades but the tips are definitely frangible!
Last edited by ShyTorque; 10th Nov 2004 at 22:30.
Shy Toque,
Fair enough, and technically correct, however I was just reacting to the continued concentration on negative aspects of NVG which is what is killing the UK and Oz attempts at getting them approved. I would ask you to re consider your statement in light of that, and perhaps the comment could be rephrased thus:
"Wires are our biggest killer, and are hard to see without a thorough wire recce even during the day. NVG now brings us the ability to conduct such a thorough recce in a similar manner to day ops, something that was previously impossible at night. This is represents a MAJOR increase in the safety of night flying, and in particular night out landings, and should therefore be pursued as a matter of priority by our regulatory authorities."
See what I'm getting at? Yep hard to see wires on NVG but what a MAJOR increase over unaided and thats the bit we need to emphasise. The CAA (and CASA) need to understand that NVGs represent a MASSIVE increase in the safety of night outlandings - particularly if that is an area of current concern.
Fair enough, and technically correct, however I was just reacting to the continued concentration on negative aspects of NVG which is what is killing the UK and Oz attempts at getting them approved. I would ask you to re consider your statement in light of that, and perhaps the comment could be rephrased thus:
"Wires are our biggest killer, and are hard to see without a thorough wire recce even during the day. NVG now brings us the ability to conduct such a thorough recce in a similar manner to day ops, something that was previously impossible at night. This is represents a MAJOR increase in the safety of night flying, and in particular night out landings, and should therefore be pursued as a matter of priority by our regulatory authorities."
See what I'm getting at? Yep hard to see wires on NVG but what a MAJOR increase over unaided and thats the bit we need to emphasise. The CAA (and CASA) need to understand that NVGs represent a MASSIVE increase in the safety of night outlandings - particularly if that is an area of current concern.
The other thing that needs to be considered is accident performance whilst wearing goggles.
With the counterweights and goggles, the alpha helmet weighs in at 3kg.
The ONLY UK trials ever conducted by anyone, is the one with the mil looking at crashworthiness of NVG using an S61 in a simulated crash up to 25 'G's'.
God only knows what spec would need to be applied to civvy performance ratings.
But on the mil results alone, the human vertebrae would have to sustain acceleration forces, the equivalent of 75kg (165lbs)(12st) resting on your shoulders
And we haven't even begun to look at impact force from goggles.
Any views from experienced wearers????
With the counterweights and goggles, the alpha helmet weighs in at 3kg.
The ONLY UK trials ever conducted by anyone, is the one with the mil looking at crashworthiness of NVG using an S61 in a simulated crash up to 25 'G's'.
God only knows what spec would need to be applied to civvy performance ratings.
But on the mil results alone, the human vertebrae would have to sustain acceleration forces, the equivalent of 75kg (165lbs)(12st) resting on your shoulders
And we haven't even begun to look at impact force from goggles.
Any views from experienced wearers????
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 425 Likes
on
224 Posts
Helmet fie,
I concur but I think they are more approriate for use in transit for the police role. If you want the CAA to agree to their introduction I suggest you stay away from the ad-hoc landings for now and concentrate on the nav assist at 500ft agl.
P.s. Sorry about your username, I just assumed we aren't using the letter "r"
TC,
My neck went up two collar sizes and I now suffer from neck trouble...... but very glad to say I didn't lose my gonads to a falling pair of goggles at 500 feet per minute ... which was a bit of a worry at the time
I concur but I think they are more approriate for use in transit for the police role. If you want the CAA to agree to their introduction I suggest you stay away from the ad-hoc landings for now and concentrate on the nav assist at 500ft agl.
P.s. Sorry about your username, I just assumed we aren't using the letter "r"
TC,
My neck went up two collar sizes and I now suffer from neck trouble...... but very glad to say I didn't lose my gonads to a falling pair of goggles at 500 feet per minute ... which was a bit of a worry at the time
Good question TC. The NVG to helmet mount is specifically designed to allow the NVG to break away from the helmet in the event of a heavy landing type accident, reputedly around the 5 to 8 G mark. I have personally had the NVG come off and alpha helmet during a heavy landing sequence without neck damage, and I believe the Oz Army Black Hawk accident survivors did not suffer as a direct result of the NVG weight: they broke away as advertised.
There was a concern resulting from this accident that the counter weights may cause damage, and they were re modified in the Oz Army to break away as well, where as previously they were fixed to the helmet by a local ill considered (in hind sight only) SOP.
ST: Gotcha. The night out landing is far more applicable to HEMS ops, but if we dont go for the whole hog now, we may find it impossible to modify later. A quick example: A UK Sea King was conducting an NVG cruise flight at approx 400 ft AGL in 1994 when the crewman noticed oil dripping inside the cabin. As soon as he remarked, the pannel lit up and they conducted an emergency let down due main trannie oil pressure falling. The aircraft was damaged on landing (a bit heavy I think) but all survived. Examination noted that a further minute or so of flight would have resulted in catastrophic failure of the trannie and then of the life on board. Outcome if unaided? I shudder to think: but the incident illistrates 2 important points:
1. Statistical evidence of accidents that were prevented are not kept, thus NVG saves can not be presented as emperical evidence to anal regulators.
2. NVG to the ground is an essential requirment for the enhancement of flight safety at night, and should be the minimum acceptable goal. It is close to the ground where safety is most positively increased: ie take off and landing, and we should continue to advertise this fact.
PS: what was the mount system you were using when your neck was damaged? What about the weight attachment system?
There was a concern resulting from this accident that the counter weights may cause damage, and they were re modified in the Oz Army to break away as well, where as previously they were fixed to the helmet by a local ill considered (in hind sight only) SOP.
ST: Gotcha. The night out landing is far more applicable to HEMS ops, but if we dont go for the whole hog now, we may find it impossible to modify later. A quick example: A UK Sea King was conducting an NVG cruise flight at approx 400 ft AGL in 1994 when the crewman noticed oil dripping inside the cabin. As soon as he remarked, the pannel lit up and they conducted an emergency let down due main trannie oil pressure falling. The aircraft was damaged on landing (a bit heavy I think) but all survived. Examination noted that a further minute or so of flight would have resulted in catastrophic failure of the trannie and then of the life on board. Outcome if unaided? I shudder to think: but the incident illistrates 2 important points:
1. Statistical evidence of accidents that were prevented are not kept, thus NVG saves can not be presented as emperical evidence to anal regulators.
2. NVG to the ground is an essential requirment for the enhancement of flight safety at night, and should be the minimum acceptable goal. It is close to the ground where safety is most positively increased: ie take off and landing, and we should continue to advertise this fact.
PS: what was the mount system you were using when your neck was damaged? What about the weight attachment system?
Last edited by helmet fire; 10th Nov 2004 at 22:54.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Australia
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I noticed a reply mentioning the Victoria Police Air Wing in Melbourne Australia and their NVG Trial.
Well anyway I'm the guy who organised and ran it 2 years ago now. I have been pushing CASA since 1996 for use of NVGs with stiff opposition that defies logic. But since the trial CASA has certainly become more positive and a CMI (Compliance Management Instruction) has been drafted and refined that will pave the way for NVG use by those who comply with the requirements. I am waiting for the beauracratic wheels to turn to ruber stamp the CMI. I hope!
For those who want to explore the trial in more detail and learn the benefits of aided flight I wrote a detailed report on the NVG trial and is available for download from: www.simflight.com.au/Post_NVG_Trial.htm
It is a declassified pdf file of 421KB
The report goes into depth also on Cockpit mod and ANVIS 9 (ITT F4949 goggles)
For those who have used ANVIS 9 don't need convincing....those who have not or have used older generation stuff then you need to be properly informed because modern NVGs will have an imense impact on improving night flying safety as well as efficiency to do the job. Years from now pilots will look back on us and say, "How come those idiots took so long to get NVGs into civil aviation...they must of been nuts to procrastinate for so long"
Well anyway I'm the guy who organised and ran it 2 years ago now. I have been pushing CASA since 1996 for use of NVGs with stiff opposition that defies logic. But since the trial CASA has certainly become more positive and a CMI (Compliance Management Instruction) has been drafted and refined that will pave the way for NVG use by those who comply with the requirements. I am waiting for the beauracratic wheels to turn to ruber stamp the CMI. I hope!
For those who want to explore the trial in more detail and learn the benefits of aided flight I wrote a detailed report on the NVG trial and is available for download from: www.simflight.com.au/Post_NVG_Trial.htm
It is a declassified pdf file of 421KB
The report goes into depth also on Cockpit mod and ANVIS 9 (ITT F4949 goggles)
For those who have used ANVIS 9 don't need convincing....those who have not or have used older generation stuff then you need to be properly informed because modern NVGs will have an imense impact on improving night flying safety as well as efficiency to do the job. Years from now pilots will look back on us and say, "How come those idiots took so long to get NVGs into civil aviation...they must of been nuts to procrastinate for so long"
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Victoria
Posts: 188
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the popular comment "what price do you put on a human life..."
so what price do we put on the service of these aircraft & lives of the crew whose role it is to do the life saving of these 'invaluable lives'
personally i believe that this is a technology that could be put to great use saving the lives of the lifesavers.
Mike check your PM's
so what price do we put on the service of these aircraft & lives of the crew whose role it is to do the life saving of these 'invaluable lives'
personally i believe that this is a technology that could be put to great use saving the lives of the lifesavers.
Mike check your PM's
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Liverpool based Geordie, so calm down, calm down kidda!!
Age: 60
Posts: 2,051
Likes: 0
Received 17 Likes
on
6 Posts
The question of nightsun slaving to cameras.... The EC135 with nightsun2 does this, it is an excellent system. We use it at liverpool all the time.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a Police unit with a HEMS approval we've been doing night ad hoc landings for years, it's the most dangerous situation in our operation. Anything that adds another string to our bow is welcome. I want NVIS as well !!!!!
Jayteeto: It was a catch question. Kalif has never flown new gen police a/c...all his police time was with the AS355 which never had slaving as an option???
Bearintheair: Have to be careful answering this: You must therefore be the only county in the UK that can do police HEMS at night...so that'll be Wilts? (or is it Sussex).
How in the name of faith you pulled that one over the CAA I'll never know
We get round it, much to their frustration by employing 'Casevac'.
Bearintheair: Have to be careful answering this: You must therefore be the only county in the UK that can do police HEMS at night...so that'll be Wilts? (or is it Sussex).
How in the name of faith you pulled that one over the CAA I'll never know
We get round it, much to their frustration by employing 'Casevac'.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: The Middle bit
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MmmmH!
well I could say dodgy...but I wont as I dont want to provoke the what is now becoming a flood of rage on another thread.
Best of luck to Wilts.
I would have thought, in the dead of night, a land ambulance would be just as quick?
well I could say dodgy...but I wont as I dont want to provoke the what is now becoming a flood of rage on another thread.
Best of luck to Wilts.
I would have thought, in the dead of night, a land ambulance would be just as quick?
hnh:
Take a look at a map of Wiltshire before you make statements like that.
Yes, there are some big towns, but there are also some very isolated bits, and the ambulance cover being relatively thinly stretched at night (cabs at Seend fork, anyone ?) still means a helicopter may be able to get there faster.
Take a look at a map of Wiltshire before you make statements like that.
Yes, there are some big towns, but there are also some very isolated bits, and the ambulance cover being relatively thinly stretched at night (cabs at Seend fork, anyone ?) still means a helicopter may be able to get there faster.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unbelievable, the level of ignorance shown of an IR is staggering. Clearly many of you have never been higher than the bottom of a cloud
As a police pilot, with an IR, lets look a a couple of situations:
1) How about fog? The horizontal visibility may stop us flying but it may only be a couple of hundred feet thick and you can see down through it.
2) What if it is clear at the other end? Some of us have large areas to cover where the weather can be very different from one end to the other
Currency - You do NOT have to fly a seperate trip to stay current. 3 approaches and a couple of hours every 90 days is all that is needed and at the moment that is only a recomendation. Holds are not even tested on a renewal.
Fuel reserves - its all about planning. If you know the weather is going to be bad, plan for it and carry the fuel. With some thought most of us can divert somewhere (yes I know not everybody will be able to).
Many of us now fly stabilised single pilot IF capable machines with very good autopilots. If you are genuinely in the soup, forget the hands on macho use the autopilot and manage the situation, don't firefire it.
IF calls for a different style of flying that many dinosaurs call button pushing! When the dinosaurs retire, we can move police aviation forward.
As a police pilot, with an IR, lets look a a couple of situations:
1) How about fog? The horizontal visibility may stop us flying but it may only be a couple of hundred feet thick and you can see down through it.
2) What if it is clear at the other end? Some of us have large areas to cover where the weather can be very different from one end to the other
Currency - You do NOT have to fly a seperate trip to stay current. 3 approaches and a couple of hours every 90 days is all that is needed and at the moment that is only a recomendation. Holds are not even tested on a renewal.
Fuel reserves - its all about planning. If you know the weather is going to be bad, plan for it and carry the fuel. With some thought most of us can divert somewhere (yes I know not everybody will be able to).
Many of us now fly stabilised single pilot IF capable machines with very good autopilots. If you are genuinely in the soup, forget the hands on macho
use the autopilot and manage the situation, don't firefire it.IF calls for a different style of flying that many dinosaurs call button pushing! When the dinosaurs retire, we can move police aviation forward.