Night Vision Goggles (NVG discussions merged)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the N3s is currently in a G inspection, and the NVG mod is being done while the machine is offline. Should be up mid December, and hopefully full steam ahead.
From what we are told, the Helimun goggles meet the CASA requirement, but we haven't had a close look at them. They are priced pretty much the same as ANVIS, but at least they are obtainable....
And there has been a changing of the guard within the big house, as you are probably aware....be interesting to see how the new chap rises to the occasion.
Scouts out!
From what we are told, the Helimun goggles meet the CASA requirement, but we haven't had a close look at them. They are priced pretty much the same as ANVIS, but at least they are obtainable....
And there has been a changing of the guard within the big house, as you are probably aware....be interesting to see how the new chap rises to the occasion.
Scouts out!
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Home
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NVG's
Helmet,
Just my views regarding civvy NVG's. Hope that the best possible is given to do the job. The companies will cetainly demand more of their crew. Hope that when the time comes, crews will be able to say NO when it reaches the equipment, environment and human(Mk 1 eyeball) limits to "press on". Stay safe to fly another day.
Just my views regarding civvy NVG's. Hope that the best possible is given to do the job. The companies will cetainly demand more of their crew. Hope that when the time comes, crews will be able to say NO when it reaches the equipment, environment and human(Mk 1 eyeball) limits to "press on". Stay safe to fly another day.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: no fixed abode
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Heard a rumor that the rescue operator in tasmania is about to do a course in NVG operation and instuction and is fitting out a twin squirrell to be compatable so as to tie up the australian market in training.
CASA has released an ammendment to CAO 82.0 that will effectively ban NVG use in Australian helicopters unless the AOC holder gains specific approval from CASA.
Approval will only be considered for operators involved in specialised operations such as EMS, Law enforcement, etc. Operators who have attained approval in accordance with the CMI will be able to continue, all others will need to gain approval. Eventually, CAO 82.6 is proposed for release in July 2007 covering NVG in the form of a 12 month trial.
During the trial, approved operators will have a seat at the review table to examine and evolve the operating procdures with a view to either releasing a more widely available CAO 82.6 (ie not a trial and open to other types of operations) or incorporating the procedures into the new Part 133.
The CASA side of the working group has changed significantly with the appointment of Greg Vaughan to oversee the project in his capacity as Group General Manager (GA), Mick Haxell retiring to greener pastures and the addition of Yvette Lutze (previously of Australian Helos, CHC, etc) into the team. It is great for the industry that Yvette has joined up with her recent industry background and she has bought a really positive drive to the process.
Very unfortunatley for CASA, Duffy has announced that he too is exiting stage left for greener pastures (literally greener - back to Oakey!!). Duffy has been an absolute driving force for NVG within the CASA side of the working group, and the HAA will miss his input greatly. AAARRRFFF! Thanks Duffy!
Although not quite September 1 2005 as promised, the end is nigh! CAO 82.6 is nearly here.
Approval will only be considered for operators involved in specialised operations such as EMS, Law enforcement, etc. Operators who have attained approval in accordance with the CMI will be able to continue, all others will need to gain approval. Eventually, CAO 82.6 is proposed for release in July 2007 covering NVG in the form of a 12 month trial.
During the trial, approved operators will have a seat at the review table to examine and evolve the operating procdures with a view to either releasing a more widely available CAO 82.6 (ie not a trial and open to other types of operations) or incorporating the procedures into the new Part 133.
The CASA side of the working group has changed significantly with the appointment of Greg Vaughan to oversee the project in his capacity as Group General Manager (GA), Mick Haxell retiring to greener pastures and the addition of Yvette Lutze (previously of Australian Helos, CHC, etc) into the team. It is great for the industry that Yvette has joined up with her recent industry background and she has bought a really positive drive to the process.
Very unfortunatley for CASA, Duffy has announced that he too is exiting stage left for greener pastures (literally greener - back to Oakey!!). Duffy has been an absolute driving force for NVG within the CASA side of the working group, and the HAA will miss his input greatly. AAARRRFFF! Thanks Duffy!
Although not quite September 1 2005 as promised, the end is nigh! CAO 82.6 is nearly here.
Well done, Helmet Fire, for your pushing on this aspect of heli ops. We need people of your experience to keep CASA on their toes.
No tears over Hax departing, but a real shame to lose Doof. Both my contacts in Brisbane are now gone, so I will need to groom some more!
Does that mean that i now cannot buy NVGs in the US and use them? You said previously that if somebody could obtain them, there was no law against using them.
No tears over Hax departing, but a real shame to lose Doof. Both my contacts in Brisbane are now gone, so I will need to groom some more!
Does that mean that i now cannot buy NVGs in the US and use them? You said previously that if somebody could obtain them, there was no law against using them.
Yep, the instrument includes you AEC.
Here it is: http://www.casa.gov.au/rules/miscinst/2007/CASA30.pdf
Previous to the issue of the instrument it was not illegal to use the NVG as long as you could prove you were not doing do recklessly - ie proper training, equipment, resourcing, and on gonig standards.
Intrestingly, they have also moved to ban NV Devices, not just NVG. That woulod include things like the Cheltenham artificial terrain displays, "highway in the sky" type technology and even FLIR. But remember, the ban is not on the equipment, it is on the use of that equipment as the primary means of terrain avoidance: ie flight below LSALT at night established by CAR 174.
It is also a dissallowable instrument that can be removed at the parliamentary level if you mount a sufficient case against it.
The instrument is really only a precursor to the release of CAO 82.6 on NVG approx Jul 2007 which would have the same effect as the instrument. Though even the CAO is a dissallowable instrument if the industry elected to fight it.
The HAA compromised it's position that NVD could be controlled through an outcomes based CAAP at the June 13th 2006 working group meeting in Canberra in return for which CASA agreed to use HAA derived content for the order unless a safety case existed against adoption.
The HAA content was an Australianised version of the SC-196 international standards that was workshopped by HAA members at conferences and was unanimously voted on and ratified by 65 HAA members on the Sunshine Coast in 2005.
The content then underwent significant change in a compromise effort to get CASA to agree to it, even though the sole safety case put forward was in technical standards (and was adopted in whole by the HAA.)
In the last series of working groups, the new members under the direction of Greg Vaughan have made the meetings amiable, constructive and achieving more progress in the first meeting of 2007 than the previous 16 years. I am not exagerating. This kicked off around c1991.
As I said previously - this credit is due to Greg V, Duffy, Yvette Lutze, John Grima, and Peter O'Keefe (soon to be joined by John Beasey who made significant contributions earlier with Mike Tavcar). The result of this progress will pop out in Jul 2007 as CAO 82.6, though not quite what the industry voted for in Jun 2005, the closest compromises that could be reached within the legal, regulatory, and risk culture within CASA. They are not quite ready to hand over control of the assylum just yet!!
CAO 82.6 will represent one of the early outcomes of the CEO's vision that future regulation will be formulated by industry subject matter experts based on international practices and adopted unless a safety case exists against it. Whilst we haven't quite achieved that nirvana, a huge effort within CASA to overcome old approaches (and a lot of perserverance on the industry side) has created a sensible start point that we can kick off from.
The CAO will create a trial framework that will be subject to significant reviews in the first 12 months by a pannel consiting of CASA (particulalry John Beasey and Yvette Lutze) the HAA, and all participant operators and will be taking submissions by other intrested parties.
What a great way to kick off the 2007 Industry/Regulator relationship.
Here it is: http://www.casa.gov.au/rules/miscinst/2007/CASA30.pdf
Previous to the issue of the instrument it was not illegal to use the NVG as long as you could prove you were not doing do recklessly - ie proper training, equipment, resourcing, and on gonig standards.
Intrestingly, they have also moved to ban NV Devices, not just NVG. That woulod include things like the Cheltenham artificial terrain displays, "highway in the sky" type technology and even FLIR. But remember, the ban is not on the equipment, it is on the use of that equipment as the primary means of terrain avoidance: ie flight below LSALT at night established by CAR 174.
It is also a dissallowable instrument that can be removed at the parliamentary level if you mount a sufficient case against it.
The instrument is really only a precursor to the release of CAO 82.6 on NVG approx Jul 2007 which would have the same effect as the instrument. Though even the CAO is a dissallowable instrument if the industry elected to fight it.
The HAA compromised it's position that NVD could be controlled through an outcomes based CAAP at the June 13th 2006 working group meeting in Canberra in return for which CASA agreed to use HAA derived content for the order unless a safety case existed against adoption.
The HAA content was an Australianised version of the SC-196 international standards that was workshopped by HAA members at conferences and was unanimously voted on and ratified by 65 HAA members on the Sunshine Coast in 2005.
The content then underwent significant change in a compromise effort to get CASA to agree to it, even though the sole safety case put forward was in technical standards (and was adopted in whole by the HAA.)
In the last series of working groups, the new members under the direction of Greg Vaughan have made the meetings amiable, constructive and achieving more progress in the first meeting of 2007 than the previous 16 years. I am not exagerating. This kicked off around c1991.
As I said previously - this credit is due to Greg V, Duffy, Yvette Lutze, John Grima, and Peter O'Keefe (soon to be joined by John Beasey who made significant contributions earlier with Mike Tavcar). The result of this progress will pop out in Jul 2007 as CAO 82.6, though not quite what the industry voted for in Jun 2005, the closest compromises that could be reached within the legal, regulatory, and risk culture within CASA. They are not quite ready to hand over control of the assylum just yet!!
CAO 82.6 will represent one of the early outcomes of the CEO's vision that future regulation will be formulated by industry subject matter experts based on international practices and adopted unless a safety case exists against it. Whilst we haven't quite achieved that nirvana, a huge effort within CASA to overcome old approaches (and a lot of perserverance on the industry side) has created a sensible start point that we can kick off from.
The CAO will create a trial framework that will be subject to significant reviews in the first 12 months by a pannel consiting of CASA (particulalry John Beasey and Yvette Lutze) the HAA, and all participant operators and will be taking submissions by other intrested parties.
What a great way to kick off the 2007 Industry/Regulator relationship.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Oz
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Night Vision Competency Standards
A new competency standard will be included within the soon to be released AVI08 Aviation Training Package, due in Apr/May 08. This standard incorporates the requirements to conduct night aided vision aviation operations, and has been endorsed by CASA/HAA and various other interested parties. This standard fits within the National Training Framework as an optional 'skill set' for those fixed and rotary wing operators that require the use of night aided vision.
The standard was also written to include FLR/Thermal Imaging and other devices/sensors used to supplement and/or enhance night vision operations. It is anticipated that the training requirements will be clearly understood by all those who read the standard, and the assessment context of the unit will be as directed by CASA and the organisation using them. The CASA flight standard will essentially directly reflect the operational preparation, usage and after use requirements as detailed in the standard.
The standard was also written to include FLR/Thermal Imaging and other devices/sensors used to supplement and/or enhance night vision operations. It is anticipated that the training requirements will be clearly understood by all those who read the standard, and the assessment context of the unit will be as directed by CASA and the organisation using them. The CASA flight standard will essentially directly reflect the operational preparation, usage and after use requirements as detailed in the standard.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NVG or Night Vision Systems
Ok new boy here so be gentle.
Am in the Mil but chat to lots of ex mates who are now civvy drivers. Does any one know why the CAA has this anti NVG thing going on. Or is it barrack room stuff and they are NOT opposed to it's use. I read the glossy mags we all see and it would seem that plenty of other countries are using NVG quite safely (makes night hell of a lot safer in my opinion) whats our story from those who do it civvy please.
Am in the Mil but chat to lots of ex mates who are now civvy drivers. Does any one know why the CAA has this anti NVG thing going on. Or is it barrack room stuff and they are NOT opposed to it's use. I read the glossy mags we all see and it would seem that plenty of other countries are using NVG quite safely (makes night hell of a lot safer in my opinion) whats our story from those who do it civvy please.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: On the green bit near the blue wobbly stuff
Posts: 674
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'm not sure there is an anti-NVG thing going on. I am ready to stand corrected, but I believe the major issue is getting NVG-compatible cockpits. Retro-fitting is expensive, not many people doing it, and does it invalidate all your warranties if you have a modification done by someone other than the original manufacturer?
I am out of the UK game recently, but I think the regulatory issues centre around firstly: training and qualification, and secondly down to the fact that you have to assume that the goggles may fail, so you must be able to carry out reversionary night-flying. Therefore, your weather limits, operating limitations etc will remain the same as if you didnt have them.
I am out of the UK game recently, but I think the regulatory issues centre around firstly: training and qualification, and secondly down to the fact that you have to assume that the goggles may fail, so you must be able to carry out reversionary night-flying. Therefore, your weather limits, operating limitations etc will remain the same as if you didnt have them.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Age: 71
Posts: 1,364
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have not been directly involved, but I was led to believe that there used to be individuals in the CAA that were entirely opposed to the use of NVG in civil aircraft.
That situation changed with the advent of some new CAA guys and a lot of hard work and money spent by a few police operators for whom NVG capability imporved their safety margin. As experience has been gained the CAA have allowed the NVG to be used for a wider range of types of police ops.
In the UK I doubt that there will be a much wider use of NVG than the police ops for a very long time. In the UK there is no HEMS at night (other than for the special case of a few Police/HEMS units). These combined operations have Nightsun and TI camera, and can only operate night HEMS in limited operating areas. If anyone were to press the CAA for pure night HEMS I suspect there would be some resistance. It would no doubt have regard to the US night HEMS accident rate.
That situation changed with the advent of some new CAA guys and a lot of hard work and money spent by a few police operators for whom NVG capability imporved their safety margin. As experience has been gained the CAA have allowed the NVG to be used for a wider range of types of police ops.
In the UK I doubt that there will be a much wider use of NVG than the police ops for a very long time. In the UK there is no HEMS at night (other than for the special case of a few Police/HEMS units). These combined operations have Nightsun and TI camera, and can only operate night HEMS in limited operating areas. If anyone were to press the CAA for pure night HEMS I suspect there would be some resistance. It would no doubt have regard to the US night HEMS accident rate.
Although it would seem that the US situation would be alleviated to some degree if NVG were available.
I think that night HEMS in UK with anything other than a 2 pilot, NVG operation would be pointless and they would need clearance to operate on goggles into field sites to give proper 24/7 capability.
I presume one of the arguments against night HEMS is that theoretically the roads are less congested at night and therefore the land ambulances get there quicker - doesn't really help those in remote/rural areas though.
I think that night HEMS in UK with anything other than a 2 pilot, NVG operation would be pointless and they would need clearance to operate on goggles into field sites to give proper 24/7 capability.
I presume one of the arguments against night HEMS is that theoretically the roads are less congested at night and therefore the land ambulances get there quicker - doesn't really help those in remote/rural areas though.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yeh good point crab, but guys I chat to seem to feel that NVG NVS which ever makes the whole operation a hell of a lot safer than doing it mortal/normal ( whatever it's called today). Still have the same limits of course in case of goggle failure but a damn sight easier to see those wires rough ground etc. Am sure that to most of us who are NVG/NVS trained going back to normal flying is going backwards really, and fecking scary!!! those big landing lights/search lights just turn ground into a big green/brown blob from height and it takes a hell of a lot more effort to ensure a safe landing.
Cost yes i agree but even then I think that some companies went to town on NVG compatable gear, always found the cheap strip lights ( ELP s ?) worked well, can;t recall what they are called but thats old age for you. Turn off all the other lights and bingo can see intruments and switches no prob. But then it has been donkeys since I have flown so I suppose it has all changed now somehow.
Cost yes i agree but even then I think that some companies went to town on NVG compatable gear, always found the cheap strip lights ( ELP s ?) worked well, can;t recall what they are called but thats old age for you. Turn off all the other lights and bingo can see intruments and switches no prob. But then it has been donkeys since I have flown so I suppose it has all changed now somehow.
Peter - ELPs worked very well in the Lynx and are a good low-cost option but not as good as a proper NVG compatible cockpit.
We brief goggle failure but I have never experienced any failures and I wonder if it is concern from the old days which is far less valid now since the kit is so much more robust and reliable.
Mortal night flying is scary once you have used goggles, you feel very vulnerable not being able to see what is around you!
We brief goggle failure but I have never experienced any failures and I wonder if it is concern from the old days which is far less valid now since the kit is so much more robust and reliable.
Mortal night flying is scary once you have used goggles, you feel very vulnerable not being able to see what is around you!
Peterprobe ....you are a brave man suggesting that nvg,s could be the way forward 
I suggested just the possibility of having your co pilot watching out with nvg,s on approach etc and was shot out of the sky Apparently only mil pilots can use them safely and even just as a backup looking for wires etc would be v v dangerous and out of the question !!!! I now have a few friends who use them in non nvg cockpits quite happily and would not dream of going back to not having them .
I have no doubt that everybody here would take up the opportunity of strapping them on when in an auto in the dark
I suggested just the possibility of having your co pilot watching out with nvg,s on approach etc and was shot out of the sky Apparently only mil pilots can use them safely and even just as a backup looking for wires etc would be v v dangerous and out of the question !!!! I now have a few friends who use them in non nvg cockpits quite happily and would not dream of going back to not having them . I have no doubt that everybody here would take up the opportunity of strapping them on when in an auto in the dark
Nigel -
I wait for the inevitable accident reports then. Your other comment
is quite wrong but you do need training before you use them.
In a recent chat with an AAIB investigator we were discussing how many of those who own their own helicopters have been successful in some field (business or sports mainly) and have been successful often because of their willingness to take risks, buck the trends or break the rules. Unfortunately, this mindset is often transferred into their flying and is a major cuase of incidents and accidents.
Flying around, untrained, with NVG in a non-lit cockpit is just arrogant and stupid.
I now have a few friends who use them in non nvg cockpits quite happily and would not dream of going back to not having them .
Apparently only mil pilots can use them safely
In a recent chat with an AAIB investigator we were discussing how many of those who own their own helicopters have been successful in some field (business or sports mainly) and have been successful often because of their willingness to take risks, buck the trends or break the rules. Unfortunately, this mindset is often transferred into their flying and is a major cuase of incidents and accidents.
Flying around, untrained, with NVG in a non-lit cockpit is just arrogant and stupid.