Night Vision Goggles (NVG discussions merged)
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: EuroGA.org
Posts: 13,787
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have never flown with NVGs (used to shoot rabbits with them, years ago) but there are basically 3 types: Gen 1, 2 and 3.
Generation 1 and 2 are mostly Russian (those on the UK market) and are not great. Under a full-ish moon, you can see a rabbit well enough to shoot at.
Gen 3 is what the military have been using since the mid-1980s. I know because I have a Gen 3 image intensifier tube in a cardboard box stuck away somewhere, and it has a 1986 date code on it. These are fantastic and really work, and for the most part don't suffer anywhere near as badly from getting washed out when picking up a stray bright light, but cannot be sold in the UK other than to military, police, etc. They are openly sold in California, and it would not take a lot of imagination to work out how to import something small like that (dismantled, etc). They are export controlled though so this would be quite a crime (if caught), and one legal way is to obtain them in Canada which last time I heard (quite some years ago) did not have export controls on them. The goggles themselves are no problem; it is the II tubes which are controlled, but the II tubes are widely used in all kinds of things e.g. tracking systems for astronomical telescopes.
As stated above, the use of NVGs requires special (low intensity) cockpit lighting. A lot of avionics and instruments are available with this as an option but it tends to be expensive stuff. Looking at the typical GA cockpit, you would have to rebuild the whole thing because you cannot have a bright warning light somewhere, coming on when you don't expect it and messing up the NV.
Generation 1 and 2 are mostly Russian (those on the UK market) and are not great. Under a full-ish moon, you can see a rabbit well enough to shoot at.
Gen 3 is what the military have been using since the mid-1980s. I know because I have a Gen 3 image intensifier tube in a cardboard box stuck away somewhere, and it has a 1986 date code on it. These are fantastic and really work, and for the most part don't suffer anywhere near as badly from getting washed out when picking up a stray bright light, but cannot be sold in the UK other than to military, police, etc. They are openly sold in California, and it would not take a lot of imagination to work out how to import something small like that (dismantled, etc). They are export controlled though so this would be quite a crime (if caught), and one legal way is to obtain them in Canada which last time I heard (quite some years ago) did not have export controls on them. The goggles themselves are no problem; it is the II tubes which are controlled, but the II tubes are widely used in all kinds of things e.g. tracking systems for astronomical telescopes.
As stated above, the use of NVGs requires special (low intensity) cockpit lighting. A lot of avionics and instruments are available with this as an option but it tends to be expensive stuff. Looking at the typical GA cockpit, you would have to rebuild the whole thing because you cannot have a bright warning light somewhere, coming on when you don't expect it and messing up the NV.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: An Irish dude in Houston, TX. I miss home!!!
Age: 43
Posts: 230
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Flying around, untrained, with NVG in a non-lit cockpit is just arrogant and stupid"
Crab, could you please explain why you think this?
SB
Crab, could you please explain why you think this?
SB
I found it difficult starting out, but yes you get used to it. You do have limited depth perception. Your scan HAS to increase big time, all while not trying to jerk your head around to make sure you don't make yourself spatial. if you only stare straight ahead, you won't see your rate of closure. I personally use about a 45 degree scan when I'm hovering, it gives you fore/aft left/right and up/down view without having to move your head too much. Not even mentioning that you only have a 40 degree field of view. In my opinion, the focusing proceedures are the most important.
Scooter Boy - trying to fly approaches on NVG without proper instruction is foolhardy to say the least. As Darren's quote highlights, there is no depth perception using NVG and your head has to be moved to scan the whole visual area because you have no peripheral vision and a 20 degree Field of View. It also takes a while to learn to interpret what you are seeing on NVGs because everything becomes a shade of green and surfaces and textures appear quite different through NVG.
So apart from the fact that you can't judge distances or rate of closure and the world looks different I can't see why we don't just let everyone have a set and let them get on with it - NOT! Add in the fact that if you have a goggle failure and your cockpit lights are turned off because they are not compatible you are suddenly in a very disorientating situation - not good when flying a helicopter.
I would suggest that some of those wanting to 'experiment' with the big boys toys will use them to push on when they should have turned back - it is unfortunately easier to get yourself into very bad weather without realising it on goggles - by the time you do notice your only option is often IFR - again not good in PPLH-land.
The military are very good at NVG but we have lots of experience and a well set up training regime - we also mostly fly 2 pilot on goggles. If you don't think that bypassing all that just because you have a big wallet isn't arrogant and stupid then you don't belong in a cockpit.
Back to AAIB man - most avoidable accidents (CFIT etc) are caused by bad decision making, often a chain of bad decisions - going flying untrained on NVG is the first of those bad decisions because being wealthy does not make you a good pilot, nor does being a good sportsman, businessman, motorsports king etc etc.
So apart from the fact that you can't judge distances or rate of closure and the world looks different I can't see why we don't just let everyone have a set and let them get on with it - NOT! Add in the fact that if you have a goggle failure and your cockpit lights are turned off because they are not compatible you are suddenly in a very disorientating situation - not good when flying a helicopter.
I would suggest that some of those wanting to 'experiment' with the big boys toys will use them to push on when they should have turned back - it is unfortunately easier to get yourself into very bad weather without realising it on goggles - by the time you do notice your only option is often IFR - again not good in PPLH-land.
The military are very good at NVG but we have lots of experience and a well set up training regime - we also mostly fly 2 pilot on goggles. If you don't think that bypassing all that just because you have a big wallet isn't arrogant and stupid then you don't belong in a cockpit.
Back to AAIB man - most avoidable accidents (CFIT etc) are caused by bad decision making, often a chain of bad decisions - going flying untrained on NVG is the first of those bad decisions because being wealthy does not make you a good pilot, nor does being a good sportsman, businessman, motorsports king etc etc.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
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.
Modern gen. goggles are a huge improvement and less affected by "white light bloom" but unfortunately aircraft cockpit displays have also moved on, giving a modern twist to an old problem. Most civilian glass cockpit displays can't be made compatible in the true sense as easily as conventional "mechanical" instruments. Obviously the light forming the "flight instruments" comes from within the glass displays themselves so electro luminescent panels (ELPs) or "cold" floodlights are redundant and useless.
Another concern with EMS use of NVG is the need for rapid response times. A rushed NVG take-off, especially in marginal ambient light conditions (i.e. marginal for the goggles), is a potential recipe for disaster.
Also, as far as I know, the British military have never allowed single crew NVG ops, nor have the US forces or the Asian service where I used to teach their use. It could be argued that two pilot ops should be the first step, NVG ops the second.
I'm not saying NVGs wouldn't work, far from it, but the concept can't be taken lightly or half-cocked.
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: europe
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
what is the generally accepted work up period for a hems/police twin engine machine? From zero NVG hours, on GenIII goggles, Single pilot, average pilot experience of 2,000hrs approx. I know there are loads of variables but im just interested as to how many instructional hours are needed and then what kind of work-up period prior to operational effectiveness?
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lots of good and educated replies here, still kinda tend to think we all ( with good intent) overcomplicate it. Why is UK not doing 24 hr HEMS and Police (some with NVG) and we all are under JAR rules!!!! Yes i know I am still in mil and have no idea about world out there but it seems a bit odd that in France Germany etc they can and do and have been for a long time. Can any civvy driver explain why in Europe you could (hopefully) be CASEVAC by heli at 5 in morning but in UK not a chance. I think some NVG may be involved somewhere along the line............. but I stand by to be corrected.
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
The funding problem.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 291
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
peterprobe - there are a number of reasons why it's not as easy as it might appear as first glance. Here are a few, in no particular order:
1. UK Police fly single pilot, often flying 3-4 hrs in a night shift, 3 or more shifts in a row. It can be intense, and is neck-aching enough sitting in a 1000' hover for 30 mins, even without the added weight of NVG. Much of the work is over built up areas where the lighting can reduce the benefits of NVG. (Many European forces operate twin pilot - but it would significantly ramp up costs for the UK to follow suit.)
2. Police do not operate in the weeds, or near them very often, but generally above 800' and well away from wires etc.
3. Ad-hoc landings in fields at night? I'd agree, NVG might be very useful but it just doesn't happen more than once a year in the three forces I'm familiar with, and would always be surveyed with Thermal Image camera & nitesun beforehand (cos they don't have NVG!). Police aircraft are most effective staying in the air & directing the troops on the ground - as soon as you land, you've lost the advantage of the third dimension so you may as well be in a car!
4. UK Police do not operate under JAR.
5. The modern police camera & nitesun kit does the job very well with a screen usually visible to both front & rear Observers, as well as the pilot. I'm not sure exactly what happens to NVG when you illuminate a rural field with a 30 million candlepower nitesun?
6. Whilst the price of NVG my be coming down, they're not cheap. Nor is making the cockpit truly NVG compatible. EC-Beans asks the training question - I don't know the answer but I do know it won't be cheap. Police budgets are being squeezed all the time - they don't have the same depth of pockets as the military and all of this would have to be funded by the UK taxpayer which, if the current shenanigans are anything to go by, would probably prefer some fiscal belt-tightening from the Government!
7. If NVG is deemed to be of significant advantage, the places to start are the really rural forces, especially in lumpy areas (like N.Wales, where the Observers have been using NVG for some time).
8. And to the 24hour ops question - it immediately adds personnel cost (at least one full-time pilot and probably two Observers), and obviously flying costs to the operation, in order to cover just 4 or 5 extra dark hours where, traditionally, most people sleep and the weather is at it's most inclement - it's a value for money question again.
All in all, and bearing in mind value for money for the taxpayer, any NVG priority should be for rural forces, with metropolitan areas last. As already mentioned, HEMS tend to be day only - and don't forget most of them are run on charitable funding - any move to night ops would increase the funding requirement significantly, even without adding NVG into the mix.
Police aviation in the UK is a very different job to military flying in most areas, even though the skill-set is similar. The use of NVG may be desirable but is not, necessarily, value for money.
1. UK Police fly single pilot, often flying 3-4 hrs in a night shift, 3 or more shifts in a row. It can be intense, and is neck-aching enough sitting in a 1000' hover for 30 mins, even without the added weight of NVG. Much of the work is over built up areas where the lighting can reduce the benefits of NVG. (Many European forces operate twin pilot - but it would significantly ramp up costs for the UK to follow suit.)
2. Police do not operate in the weeds, or near them very often, but generally above 800' and well away from wires etc.
3. Ad-hoc landings in fields at night? I'd agree, NVG might be very useful but it just doesn't happen more than once a year in the three forces I'm familiar with, and would always be surveyed with Thermal Image camera & nitesun beforehand (cos they don't have NVG!). Police aircraft are most effective staying in the air & directing the troops on the ground - as soon as you land, you've lost the advantage of the third dimension so you may as well be in a car!
4. UK Police do not operate under JAR.
5. The modern police camera & nitesun kit does the job very well with a screen usually visible to both front & rear Observers, as well as the pilot. I'm not sure exactly what happens to NVG when you illuminate a rural field with a 30 million candlepower nitesun?
6. Whilst the price of NVG my be coming down, they're not cheap. Nor is making the cockpit truly NVG compatible. EC-Beans asks the training question - I don't know the answer but I do know it won't be cheap. Police budgets are being squeezed all the time - they don't have the same depth of pockets as the military and all of this would have to be funded by the UK taxpayer which, if the current shenanigans are anything to go by, would probably prefer some fiscal belt-tightening from the Government!
7. If NVG is deemed to be of significant advantage, the places to start are the really rural forces, especially in lumpy areas (like N.Wales, where the Observers have been using NVG for some time).
8. And to the 24hour ops question - it immediately adds personnel cost (at least one full-time pilot and probably two Observers), and obviously flying costs to the operation, in order to cover just 4 or 5 extra dark hours where, traditionally, most people sleep and the weather is at it's most inclement - it's a value for money question again.
All in all, and bearing in mind value for money for the taxpayer, any NVG priority should be for rural forces, with metropolitan areas last. As already mentioned, HEMS tend to be day only - and don't forget most of them are run on charitable funding - any move to night ops would increase the funding requirement significantly, even without adding NVG into the mix.
Police aviation in the UK is a very different job to military flying in most areas, even though the skill-set is similar. The use of NVG may be desirable but is not, necessarily, value for money.
Last edited by zorab64; 2nd Oct 2008 at 00:31. Reason: add comment
Avoid imitations
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Wandering the FIR and cyberspace often at highly unsociable times
Posts: 14,576
Received 430 Likes
on
227 Posts
5. The modern police camera & nitesun kit does the job very well with a screen usually visible to both front & rear Observers, as well as the pilot. I'm not sure exactly what happens to NVG when you illuminate a rural field with a 30 million candlepower nitesun?
I am with Sky Police, the night sun does not shut down the goggles. It can be useful for clearly seeing what is on the ground from 1000 ft, but it is too bright to use low level or for landing. I think the SX5 is better than the SX16 unless you want to stay really high when using it.
When low level and landing, a standard searchlight is more than enough (300 to 450W)
IR filters should be used only for tactical reasons.
On HEMS which we fly, the night Sun is redundant. The 450W searchlight and standard landing light do the job really well. On landing and during winching, we always use the white light and it gives you terrific peripheral vision.
This is a major difference to the military use of NVG where white light will get you shot. The use of peripheral vision on landing is so fundamentally different that I think it has been one of the reasons a lot of ex mil NVG guys are against the proliferation of NVG into the civ world.
When low level and landing, a standard searchlight is more than enough (300 to 450W)
IR filters should be used only for tactical reasons.
On HEMS which we fly, the night Sun is redundant. The 450W searchlight and standard landing light do the job really well. On landing and during winching, we always use the white light and it gives you terrific peripheral vision.
This is a major difference to the military use of NVG where white light will get you shot. The use of peripheral vision on landing is so fundamentally different that I think it has been one of the reasons a lot of ex mil NVG guys are against the proliferation of NVG into the civ world.
Last edited by helmet fire; 3rd Oct 2008 at 00:44.
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Bahamas
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes, as Helmut says...the Nitsun is good, down to about 1000 ft, then becomes a PITA. I have not used the IR filter on the Spectralabs Nitesun, but I am told it has some airspeed limitations which may render it not so handy on the job.
Some Aussie operators are trialling a new nightsun, called a 'Trakka', or 'Tracker' (I'm not sure which). It has the same output as the SL light, and has the bonus of several internal filters, controlled by a wired handset...IR among them. It also features auto parking.
Hope I'm not breaking the forum rules by giving the new guys a plug, but their light does show potential.. They are manufactured in Melbourne Aus...
Cheers...
Some Aussie operators are trialling a new nightsun, called a 'Trakka', or 'Tracker' (I'm not sure which). It has the same output as the SL light, and has the bonus of several internal filters, controlled by a wired handset...IR among them. It also features auto parking.
Hope I'm not breaking the forum rules by giving the new guys a plug, but their light does show potential.. They are manufactured in Melbourne Aus...
Cheers...
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: sunny south west
Age: 73
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Civvy NVG hours
D&C Police have been flying single pilot NVG for approx 12 years. They are inches away from flying to ground level, which has now been agreed and ratified by the CAA. There is only a small contractual delay on the Brightstar (NVG compatible landing light) delivery which is required for flight.
The minimum instructional hours required for flying on NVG is 5 plus test.
There is a further 3 hrs required to go to ground level once the pilot has suitable experience at flying with the NVG which incidentaly is not below 500ft.
Nitesun above 500ft enhances the goggles and acts like a big torch, NVG's are also excellent over built up areas.
It is correct that retro fitting a cockpit to NVG spec that will pass CAA requirements is very expensive, however most new aircraft have the option to have a compatible cockpit from production.
The CAA are not against it, it just hasn't been done before and with something new it is always, slowly slowly catchee monkey.
Hope that helps.
The minimum instructional hours required for flying on NVG is 5 plus test.
There is a further 3 hrs required to go to ground level once the pilot has suitable experience at flying with the NVG which incidentaly is not below 500ft.
Nitesun above 500ft enhances the goggles and acts like a big torch, NVG's are also excellent over built up areas.
It is correct that retro fitting a cockpit to NVG spec that will pass CAA requirements is very expensive, however most new aircraft have the option to have a compatible cockpit from production.
The CAA are not against it, it just hasn't been done before and with something new it is always, slowly slowly catchee monkey.
Hope that helps.
With the clearance to ground level, will this still be single pilot or will the observer have goggles to assist with the recce and approach?
I would imagine/hope it will be down to GL as the guy in the LHS will be using the FLIR, its not difficult single Pilot NVG, good recce and ref points. If the LHS guy uses NVG then its a bonus.
That's what I thought - you want 2 pairs of eyes using the same system going into unprepared sites.
There does seem to be a marked reluctance to mix NVG and white light - sometimes it's not so wonderful (high humidity) but often it can enhance the goggle picture. I encourage pilots to use the white light landing lamps (we don't have black light) to sweep the final approach for wires (especially the field boundary) as long as it doesn't adversely affect the goggle picture.
There does seem to be a marked reluctance to mix NVG and white light - sometimes it's not so wonderful (high humidity) but often it can enhance the goggle picture. I encourage pilots to use the white light landing lamps (we don't have black light) to sweep the final approach for wires (especially the field boundary) as long as it doesn't adversely affect the goggle picture.
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: england
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
8. And to the 24hour ops question - it immediately adds personnel cost (at least one full-time pilot and probably two Observers), and obviously flying costs to the operation, in order to cover just 4 or 5 extra dark hours where, traditionally, most people sleep and the weather is at it's most inclement - it's a value for money question again.
Seems to be that most are are either going full 24/7 or changing their hours to cover that last bit of the night.
Surely the local crooks arent that stupid that they dont know when the local ASU shuts up shop, and its okay to go out burgling.?
As stated, "most people are asleep"..!
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Perth, Australia
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Western Australian Police Air Wing has been operating with NVG for six months now and find them to be the bee knees. To answer some of the questions:
- cost of ITT ANVIS 9 (Gen 3 Omni 4) is about USD$10K per set (if you can get them through the long process of order and the US State Department). Cost of other sets varies on who you talk to.
- The cockpit should be modified to be compatible. While the ANVIS 9's can only be slightly affected by unmodified lighting, the NVG lighting is better than unaided lighting anyway and corners should not be cut. Our cost was USD$60kish
- Training. In Aust (based on US and Kiwi rules), 5 hours plus test before getting basic tick in box. Additional training as required to meet role (SAR, winching, fast roping etc)
- Use over cities. We fly from the trolley to the trolley and operate over metropolitan areas 80% of aur time and find the NVG to enhance our SA. We fly at 1500ft in the Police role looking for baddies on our FLIR, but the terrain is easily seen on NVG amongst the lights. The biggest improvement is that areas that where just dark (parks, etc) before, we can now look into visually. Use of the nightsun from that height gives a nice light that brightens up everything (and not just inside the glow). Using the IR filter on the light is even better as no-one can see you looking for them. We have found lots of people that way.
-Anybody with a light (ciggy, phoneetc) is easy to see. Using the white light, reflective tape on running shoes is a standout.
- Another bonus for us is that our FLIR is fitted with a laser illuminator (wider beam than a pointer) and we illuminate an area as we approach it (the FLIR op has the area or house on screen). Instead of a vague '2:30 near that roundabout', the light on NVG illuminates the target and we pilots can see it and know where to orbit.
- When we go outside the metropolitan area, the NVG are fantastic as dark is no longer.
- Use of white light in winching and approaches is a must as it makes the NVG work better and you can see those pesky poles (haven't seen a wire yet) no matter what the illum.
We do everything on NVG and I would feel naked without them now. My only point is introduce them properly (good gear, cockpit and cabin, and training) and you are 95% safer. We do 4 hours a night and I personally don't feel the weight and feel much fresher than boring around on the clocks.
Oh, and they are dead easy to fly with, not sure what all the fuss is about.
- cost of ITT ANVIS 9 (Gen 3 Omni 4) is about USD$10K per set (if you can get them through the long process of order and the US State Department). Cost of other sets varies on who you talk to.
- The cockpit should be modified to be compatible. While the ANVIS 9's can only be slightly affected by unmodified lighting, the NVG lighting is better than unaided lighting anyway and corners should not be cut. Our cost was USD$60kish
- Training. In Aust (based on US and Kiwi rules), 5 hours plus test before getting basic tick in box. Additional training as required to meet role (SAR, winching, fast roping etc)
- Use over cities. We fly from the trolley to the trolley and operate over metropolitan areas 80% of aur time and find the NVG to enhance our SA. We fly at 1500ft in the Police role looking for baddies on our FLIR, but the terrain is easily seen on NVG amongst the lights. The biggest improvement is that areas that where just dark (parks, etc) before, we can now look into visually. Use of the nightsun from that height gives a nice light that brightens up everything (and not just inside the glow). Using the IR filter on the light is even better as no-one can see you looking for them. We have found lots of people that way.
-Anybody with a light (ciggy, phoneetc) is easy to see. Using the white light, reflective tape on running shoes is a standout.
- Another bonus for us is that our FLIR is fitted with a laser illuminator (wider beam than a pointer) and we illuminate an area as we approach it (the FLIR op has the area or house on screen). Instead of a vague '2:30 near that roundabout', the light on NVG illuminates the target and we pilots can see it and know where to orbit.
- When we go outside the metropolitan area, the NVG are fantastic as dark is no longer.
- Use of white light in winching and approaches is a must as it makes the NVG work better and you can see those pesky poles (haven't seen a wire yet) no matter what the illum.
We do everything on NVG and I would feel naked without them now. My only point is introduce them properly (good gear, cockpit and cabin, and training) and you are 95% safer. We do 4 hours a night and I personally don't feel the weight and feel much fresher than boring around on the clocks.
Oh, and they are dead easy to fly with, not sure what all the fuss is about.