NVGs & HEMS in Australia
Guest
Posts: n/a
NVGs & HEMS in Australia
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my Hammock or at the Pub!
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NVG & EMS
Sitting in an Aviation Medicine refresher the other day and listening to the all important AME tasking lectures and Boyles Law and stuff and it occurred to me that the EMS world would benefit greatly from NVG/NVD usage (black hole night sun approach arguement already understood) especially when patients require to be flown as close to sea level as possibe due sucking chest wounds and FUBAR type injuries. This currently would be difficult at night given the current rules and regs for flight at LSALTS etc.
So my question to the greater aviation RWcommunity is who is going to strap on the 3 piece suit and sell the capability to CASA from a EMS life saving perspective. Vic Pol have been successful to date with NVG trial (not sure if air ambulance was included), and the folks at Adelaide on the Aust Helicopters contracts are rumoured to be looking at raising a NVG capability for EMS, Pol air work etc, which is why 90% of their last recruitment drive was ex mil NVG rated pilots.
Maybe its time to hang up the nomex and strap on the 3 piece suit, NVG/NVD would logically be the next step for EMS assuming the TRG is conducted appropriately and the ops manual caters for items like storage and security and ongoing check and Trg.
Hmmmmmmmm
Your thoughts Pruners????
Max
So my question to the greater aviation RWcommunity is who is going to strap on the 3 piece suit and sell the capability to CASA from a EMS life saving perspective. Vic Pol have been successful to date with NVG trial (not sure if air ambulance was included), and the folks at Adelaide on the Aust Helicopters contracts are rumoured to be looking at raising a NVG capability for EMS, Pol air work etc, which is why 90% of their last recruitment drive was ex mil NVG rated pilots.
Maybe its time to hang up the nomex and strap on the 3 piece suit, NVG/NVD would logically be the next step for EMS assuming the TRG is conducted appropriately and the ops manual caters for items like storage and security and ongoing check and Trg.
Hmmmmmmmm
Your thoughts Pruners????
Max
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 55
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Contact "STARS" EMS in Calgary, Alberta, Canada...They have been certified to use NVG's for a year or so now on their Bk117's and have set the standard in North America for civillian NVG operations. They are also now approved to use them in the mountains..Miles Mozel is the Chief Pilot...
max,
All help welcome! Lose the nomex, adopt the three peice suit and go for it!!
So far only clocking over the 14 year mark to get them going against the best efforts of the civil aviation SAFETY authority! Been done succesfully in EMS over seas for 15 years plus. US has more than 30 EMS providers doing the NVG thing. Kiwis are looking at restricting night scene response to NVG aircraft only (after 12 months of NVG ops).
What is your suggestion?
Ring Mick Haxell at CASA on 131757 and discuss the options with him.
The hopes of the industry are with you Luke..........
All help welcome! Lose the nomex, adopt the three peice suit and go for it!!
So far only clocking over the 14 year mark to get them going against the best efforts of the civil aviation SAFETY authority! Been done succesfully in EMS over seas for 15 years plus. US has more than 30 EMS providers doing the NVG thing. Kiwis are looking at restricting night scene response to NVG aircraft only (after 12 months of NVG ops).
What is your suggestion?
Ring Mick Haxell at CASA on 131757 and discuss the options with him.
The hopes of the industry are with you Luke..........
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my Hammock or at the Pub!
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hey Helmut,
Yes I have heard of the contact you have listed, and if I'm right very light on for making "D's" in the NVG Dept. Not sure if the guy even flew with the full face 5's from last century. Most likely the good old T-Aid, SLS, Bardic type of dude.
The world has turned a zillion times since those days and we are now up to very reliable tubes with better than the ANVIS-6 visual acuity and depth perception that you and I trained on.
I can't see what the hold up is given the amount of NVG experinece in the market place right now. AS long as the TRG was conducted appropriately by an accredited TRG organisation with ISO-9000 compliance etc can't see the huge drama. I suspect that the insurance costs would/could be prohibitive however limited release of the NVG capabability to operators that proved they can hack it in their AOC would stop the back yard operators from tarnishing the right of passage. Have many mates in EMS that are sick and tired of the operation being more complex than it has to be due no NVG. The Black hole and Sea Level patient transfer arguements are nearly arguement enough to get the goggs in service.
Surely we are nearly there with the solution and folks like Mick are only making descisions based on their corporate knowledge? not descisons that are limiting and stalling the value of the capability.
Hmmmmm
Yes I have heard of the contact you have listed, and if I'm right very light on for making "D's" in the NVG Dept. Not sure if the guy even flew with the full face 5's from last century. Most likely the good old T-Aid, SLS, Bardic type of dude.
The world has turned a zillion times since those days and we are now up to very reliable tubes with better than the ANVIS-6 visual acuity and depth perception that you and I trained on.
I can't see what the hold up is given the amount of NVG experinece in the market place right now. AS long as the TRG was conducted appropriately by an accredited TRG organisation with ISO-9000 compliance etc can't see the huge drama. I suspect that the insurance costs would/could be prohibitive however limited release of the NVG capabability to operators that proved they can hack it in their AOC would stop the back yard operators from tarnishing the right of passage. Have many mates in EMS that are sick and tired of the operation being more complex than it has to be due no NVG. The Black hole and Sea Level patient transfer arguements are nearly arguement enough to get the goggs in service.
Surely we are nearly there with the solution and folks like Mick are only making descisions based on their corporate knowledge? not descisons that are limiting and stalling the value of the capability.
Hmmmmm
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Max,
Mick Haxell was CO 5SQN RAAF in the early 80s and introduced gen III ANVIS into ADF operations. We were probably about 10 !!
I'm sure perceived reluctance to endorse NVG is more likely due process through absolutely unimaginable Canberra bureacracy.
regards,
T
Mick Haxell was CO 5SQN RAAF in the early 80s and introduced gen III ANVIS into ADF operations. We were probably about 10 !!
I'm sure perceived reluctance to endorse NVG is more likely due process through absolutely unimaginable Canberra bureacracy.
regards,
T
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my Hammock or at the Pub!
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Trap. If thats the case I will remove both feet from my mouth and continue the thread better informed.
If what you say is true, then CASA should have enough info to make a well informed descision and get the ball rolling. NVG/NVD well managed and utilised by well trained crews means a much safer patient Transfer and safer night apps to unlit areas. I can understand the reluctance to approve all commers, however AOC's should be limited to organisations that can prove they can safely manage the capability and conduct appropriate on going check and TRG.
Surely with EMS over seas operators having used the capability for some time now Oz could see their way to CASA approvals in the not too distant future.
Seems like a waste of current technolgies and missions being more complex than they need to be?
Max
If what you say is true, then CASA should have enough info to make a well informed descision and get the ball rolling. NVG/NVD well managed and utilised by well trained crews means a much safer patient Transfer and safer night apps to unlit areas. I can understand the reluctance to approve all commers, however AOC's should be limited to organisations that can prove they can safely manage the capability and conduct appropriate on going check and TRG.
Surely with EMS over seas operators having used the capability for some time now Oz could see their way to CASA approvals in the not too distant future.
Seems like a waste of current technolgies and missions being more complex than they need to be?
Max
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: germany
Age: 55
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kiowa Jack
I've spent 8 years flying OH58Ds with ANVIS-6s and have scared myself a few times. Hell of a lot better than scaring yourself without 'em. My hats off to the EMS guys doing the job without. Now that the resources and training standards are there from so many organizations, there's no reason mission dependent roles should be without a valuable resource. Pilots like PPRuNers and PHPA members should provide the voice to break through the barriers created by a bunch of old suits who lost their medical and aren't willing to let the next generation do their job efficiently and safely.
Maxee dear friend.....
You defeat your own point by your proposition.
Since when have the regulatory agencies ever used such a unique and innovative approach to any situation?
NVG/NVD would logically be the next step for EMS
Since when have the regulatory agencies ever used such a unique and innovative approach to any situation?
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: USA
Age: 54
Posts: 305
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Aaaaah okay. Nights too dangerous indeed. We've been using our goggles for almost a year now in Arizona, over mostly rural and sometimes mountainous terrain. I never thought I would fall in love at my age with a tiny, grainy monochromatic TV tube that is, literally, a pain in the neck sometimes, but here I am with butterflies in my stomach whenever I think about her.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by maxeemum
Vic Pol have been successful to date with NVG trial (not sure if air ambulance was included),
Where is VPAW with NVG's? The only thing holding them back is the Cockpit Mod which has been a works in progress since last September when the initial cockpit survey was done by Oxley Avionics and BAe. The rest is in the bag, HOM done, ground School PP lessons done, CASA ready to sign off IAW with CMI once cockpit is done, NVG instructor in house. Then flight training will commence and once non ex-military crews are competent and proficient enough ops use will start. Ex-mil NVG pilots will of course be ready after refresher.
New VPAW commercial tender for aircraft and maintenance to commence next year specifies that contractor must make all VPAW acft NVG compatible. This is the state of play for VPAW at the moment. VPAW does not want to procrastinate and argue any further, just do it once and for all!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Australia
Posts: 1,957
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
EMS/NVG, this may be an idiot Q.
How many patients % wise have to be transported as near to sea level as possible. Does the med profession stipulate max ROC for critical atmospheric pressure or do they just say it is desirable to fly ‘sucking hole’ patients etc. close to sea level?
It could be that a density alt change rate of 300 FPM (say) is quite ok up to a designated density altitude (at or above LSALT) for that very small % of patients.
Have they ever quantified relationships between atmospheric and different combinations of systolic/diastolic pressures?
Given that if a patient is picked up in the OZ populated coastal fringes where most of the work happens, the machine is hardly going to bore holes in rising terrain to keep a low ambient deck pressure or climb very high unless the patient pick up spot is up in the hinterland.
Does the medical and aviation regulatory professions take into consideration the fact that at night, when NVG’s are required, there will be in most places in OZ a ten degree downward shift in temp and therefore much less density altitude than what they might be thinking of as in daylight hours.
I know that every time I have been asked to make sure the pilot (FW or RW) flies at a low altitude I have asked in return, would height xxxx be acceptable and never was my request able to be quantified.
Every time when asked that I made a point of asking the pilot upon his return “was there any change in the patient when you arrived at altitude xxxx?” They always have said no and such was noted in the company daily diary.
Would it be right to say that in rotary EMS work the only requirement for NVG and the encompassing regs is when the machine is to fly below LSALT on app/dep a remote pick up site?
It may be that there is a whole lot of hype and unnecessary regs bogging down the introduction of these procedures.
Surveillance work, different and a multitude of different skills/quals are perhaps required, no questions.
It could be that a density alt change rate of 300 FPM (say) is quite ok up to a designated density altitude (at or above LSALT) for that very small % of patients.
Have they ever quantified relationships between atmospheric and different combinations of systolic/diastolic pressures?
Given that if a patient is picked up in the OZ populated coastal fringes where most of the work happens, the machine is hardly going to bore holes in rising terrain to keep a low ambient deck pressure or climb very high unless the patient pick up spot is up in the hinterland.
Does the medical and aviation regulatory professions take into consideration the fact that at night, when NVG’s are required, there will be in most places in OZ a ten degree downward shift in temp and therefore much less density altitude than what they might be thinking of as in daylight hours.
I know that every time I have been asked to make sure the pilot (FW or RW) flies at a low altitude I have asked in return, would height xxxx be acceptable and never was my request able to be quantified.
Every time when asked that I made a point of asking the pilot upon his return “was there any change in the patient when you arrived at altitude xxxx?” They always have said no and such was noted in the company daily diary.
Would it be right to say that in rotary EMS work the only requirement for NVG and the encompassing regs is when the machine is to fly below LSALT on app/dep a remote pick up site?
It may be that there is a whole lot of hype and unnecessary regs bogging down the introduction of these procedures.
Surveillance work, different and a multitude of different skills/quals are perhaps required, no questions.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: In my Hammock or at the Pub!
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect there are no absolutes when it comes to AVMED, as is the same when it comes to Aviation. Concepts are important. If the pressure decreases with altitude (WE KNOW THIS TO BE TRUE) then staying as low as safely possible is beneficial when it comes to having holes in your body that leak bodily fluids out board. Many car accidents result in lacerations cuts and holes etc so % wise there are large numbers of folks with holes in them when they are being transported by air. Transport by air rather than road is generally organised for the speed factor. Having to climb up/down to LSALT and let down at the other end adds t++++ (timings plus) to your mission and hence the speed factor is not as speedy as it could/should be.
As far as the DA being lower at night than day, this only makes the machine perform better (more bernoulis) not the patient. The patient is still subject to Press varies proportionally with height. As far as agencies challenging what altitude is acceptable to be flown at, they won't as the Aviatior is supposed to be the subject matter expert and hence advise what is a good compramise for flight safety vs patient transfer. Hence most non aviator folks will be happy with what is offered.
If NVG allow you as the PIC to fly below LSALT at night and hence lower than when you are unaided, then you are presenting the patient at the other end (Hospital facility) in potentially a more stable position so the dudes in the white suits can perform their duties. Enough Said.
The black hole night approach, manoeuvring and departing an unlit area is easier/safer to fly with the addition of NVG and that alone may be enough to tip the scales away from night unaided ops.
At present other EMS operations over seas have and use NVG with all the rules and regs in place, so why not OZ?
Max
As far as the DA being lower at night than day, this only makes the machine perform better (more bernoulis) not the patient. The patient is still subject to Press varies proportionally with height. As far as agencies challenging what altitude is acceptable to be flown at, they won't as the Aviatior is supposed to be the subject matter expert and hence advise what is a good compramise for flight safety vs patient transfer. Hence most non aviator folks will be happy with what is offered.
If NVG allow you as the PIC to fly below LSALT at night and hence lower than when you are unaided, then you are presenting the patient at the other end (Hospital facility) in potentially a more stable position so the dudes in the white suits can perform their duties. Enough Said.
The black hole night approach, manoeuvring and departing an unlit area is easier/safer to fly with the addition of NVG and that alone may be enough to tip the scales away from night unaided ops.
At present other EMS operations over seas have and use NVG with all the rules and regs in place, so why not OZ?
Max
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Australia
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The use of NVG would/will enhance all types of operations in many ways too numerous to list here. They simply make the critical phases of any flight so much safer.
Recent converts frequently comment that "I don't know how we did it without them" and "I can't believe how much I didn't see."
The wheel will turn and the luddites will eventually be forced to come on board.
Sol
Recent converts frequently comment that "I don't know how we did it without them" and "I can't believe how much I didn't see."
The wheel will turn and the luddites will eventually be forced to come on board.
Sol
So many issues, so little time!
Traps: you forgot to mention that Mick Haxell is also a Master Aviator in the pilot's guild, one of very few helicopter pilots to attain that award.
I am intrested in your other comment that NVG reluctance was due "more likely" to paperwork bureaucracy. More likely than what?
TopETQ and Max: low altitude issues are of little relevance to the overall push for NVG, and the statistics and technical aspects are a red herring: though beneficial to the poor ba5tard with the pnuemathorax as they so demonstrably are. NVG are primarliy for safety.
As a secondary, the EMS helicopter essentially justifies itself in only three ways:
1. Speed. Speed of response, speed of search, speed of transport, etc.
2. Access. Ability to access patients that no other vehicle can, or could practically access, to insert medical aid, search remote/rugged/offshore areas, and provide extraction, etc.
3. Concentrate Assets (force multiplier). Ability to bring higher level care/equipment/personnel to patient/incident.
NVG positively impact on all these aspects. It increases speed by reducing planning requirements significantly, reduces need for laborious night-sun approach and landings, reduces spiral climbs for terrain avoidance, dramatically increases speed of locating patients at night, etc, etc, etc. It increases access by safely enabling remote area night seraches (which can be done now, just not efficiently or with low risk). Lastly, the improved speed and access enables asset concentration at night with significantly less risk.
But remember: the number one reason is safety.
There is currently NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT to strapping the goggs on right now and flying as long as you adhere to the current rules and regs. There is a Compiance Management Instruction (CMI) out that you can adhere to that allows you to gain the real benefits of NVG and use them as if you were on NVG rather than using them as if you didnt have them at all. Thanks to Mike Tavcar and the Victorian Police Airwing (VPAW).
The whole OZ industry will benefit from the labours of Tavcar and VPAW. Do a search and look up these names with NVG, and particularly the trial that NASUS mentions.
Oz lags the world by YEARS in getting over the fact that not only gifted ex military pilots are good enought to fly NVG safely. Hopefully VPAW will show us what the world has been trying to show us for 15 years.
Traps: you forgot to mention that Mick Haxell is also a Master Aviator in the pilot's guild, one of very few helicopter pilots to attain that award.
I am intrested in your other comment that NVG reluctance was due "more likely" to paperwork bureaucracy. More likely than what?
TopETQ and Max: low altitude issues are of little relevance to the overall push for NVG, and the statistics and technical aspects are a red herring: though beneficial to the poor ba5tard with the pnuemathorax as they so demonstrably are. NVG are primarliy for safety.
As a secondary, the EMS helicopter essentially justifies itself in only three ways:
1. Speed. Speed of response, speed of search, speed of transport, etc.
2. Access. Ability to access patients that no other vehicle can, or could practically access, to insert medical aid, search remote/rugged/offshore areas, and provide extraction, etc.
3. Concentrate Assets (force multiplier). Ability to bring higher level care/equipment/personnel to patient/incident.
NVG positively impact on all these aspects. It increases speed by reducing planning requirements significantly, reduces need for laborious night-sun approach and landings, reduces spiral climbs for terrain avoidance, dramatically increases speed of locating patients at night, etc, etc, etc. It increases access by safely enabling remote area night seraches (which can be done now, just not efficiently or with low risk). Lastly, the improved speed and access enables asset concentration at night with significantly less risk.
But remember: the number one reason is safety.
There is currently NO LEGAL IMPEDIMENT to strapping the goggs on right now and flying as long as you adhere to the current rules and regs. There is a Compiance Management Instruction (CMI) out that you can adhere to that allows you to gain the real benefits of NVG and use them as if you were on NVG rather than using them as if you didnt have them at all. Thanks to Mike Tavcar and the Victorian Police Airwing (VPAW).
The whole OZ industry will benefit from the labours of Tavcar and VPAW. Do a search and look up these names with NVG, and particularly the trial that NASUS mentions.
Oz lags the world by YEARS in getting over the fact that not only gifted ex military pilots are good enought to fly NVG safely. Hopefully VPAW will show us what the world has been trying to show us for 15 years.
Contact "STARS" EMS in Calgary, Alberta, Canada...They have been certified to use NVG's for a year or so now on their Bk117's and have set the standard in North America for civillian NVG operations. They are also now approved to use them in the mountains..Miles Mozel is the Chief Pilot...
If anyone is serious about the application and regulatory approvals for this type of operation, they will not go far wrong in talking to Aviation Specialties Unlimited.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Helmet fire,
Yep Mike T did start the NVG project back in mid 90's and it is a shame that it has taken this long to even get this far, which by the way is still not there yet. I know the MT tried to get somewhere with Haxell who on the surface sympathised with the NVG cause but did substantially nothing to further it. Others, like Greg Olssen and the HAA have in recent years also taken on the battle to further the NVG cause for the benefit of all. It was only after the VPAW NVG Trial, now almost 4 years ago, that things started to move because of an excellent VIC/TAS CASA Team leader who got off his backside and did something positive to see the Trial start and the VPAW application proceed. Thankfully CASA people like Beasy & Anderson are in the CASA system who believe in progressing not stagnating.
I hope that Olssen,the HAA and others continue to lobby strongly for NVGs but I also hope they do not get to influenced by operators who want a cheap fix and FAA rules, which are not necessarily world's best practice.
If you think training is expensive try having an accident.....
Yep Mike T did start the NVG project back in mid 90's and it is a shame that it has taken this long to even get this far, which by the way is still not there yet. I know the MT tried to get somewhere with Haxell who on the surface sympathised with the NVG cause but did substantially nothing to further it. Others, like Greg Olssen and the HAA have in recent years also taken on the battle to further the NVG cause for the benefit of all. It was only after the VPAW NVG Trial, now almost 4 years ago, that things started to move because of an excellent VIC/TAS CASA Team leader who got off his backside and did something positive to see the Trial start and the VPAW application proceed. Thankfully CASA people like Beasy & Anderson are in the CASA system who believe in progressing not stagnating.
I hope that Olssen,the HAA and others continue to lobby strongly for NVGs but I also hope they do not get to influenced by operators who want a cheap fix and FAA rules, which are not necessarily world's best practice.
If you think training is expensive try having an accident.....