Flying at Night
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Horror Box:
What appears to be missing is instrument information on rate of closure / deceleration with the rig for the last segment. The issue is that the visual information isn't particularly reliable / repeatable and that's what should be made better.
What appears to be missing is instrument information on rate of closure / deceleration with the rig for the last segment. The issue is that the visual information isn't particularly reliable / repeatable and that's what should be made better.
Thread Starter
I can't help but think we're missing the enormous ' Elephant in the Room' here. So, we can see from the stats, that half of the accidents and just over half the casualties in the UK Offshore market in the past 20 years have been during night flights. Just a quick glance through the latest accidents reported on here, there are titles such as '212 Accident Dubai', '139 Down Abu Dhabi', and 'GOM Air Log & EEL Crash'. These are the latest offshore accidents, all of them night flights.
Yet when we think of solutions, people talk about technology, new proceedures, training, NVG's etc. For the military, police and HEMS maybe because there is an added pressure and need to get the job done, but this is just public transport. There is no real need to put aircraft and passengers at risk ??? Just do it during the daytime.
We seem to spend a fortune sending people on courses to learn how to lift a box correctly and sit correctly at a computer terminal. The oil companies proudly state that safety comes first and who amongst us would dare not to hold the handrail when descending a flight of stairs - Heaven knows what could happen !!! And yet, lets stick 19 people in a helicopter and have effectively a single pilot making an approach in the dark with limited visual cues as to descent and closure - Hey no problem !!
The oil companies seem to be for ever looking at miniscule ways to reinvent the wheel and eek out that last ounce of safety. Well I could flick a switch and statistically cut the number of deaths on the North Sea by 50% - Just stop flying at night. QED !
Yet when we think of solutions, people talk about technology, new proceedures, training, NVG's etc. For the military, police and HEMS maybe because there is an added pressure and need to get the job done, but this is just public transport. There is no real need to put aircraft and passengers at risk ??? Just do it during the daytime.
We seem to spend a fortune sending people on courses to learn how to lift a box correctly and sit correctly at a computer terminal. The oil companies proudly state that safety comes first and who amongst us would dare not to hold the handrail when descending a flight of stairs - Heaven knows what could happen !!! And yet, lets stick 19 people in a helicopter and have effectively a single pilot making an approach in the dark with limited visual cues as to descent and closure - Hey no problem !!
The oil companies seem to be for ever looking at miniscule ways to reinvent the wheel and eek out that last ounce of safety. Well I could flick a switch and statistically cut the number of deaths on the North Sea by 50% - Just stop flying at night. QED !
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK.
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No need to invent different types of approaches...get more technology etc etc..as horror box stated, standard ARA MAP @ 0.75nm, 300' at night is close enough for me...A set procedure to arrive at that point, difficult enough some nights but then it's that last bit flown manually with marginal vis,(especially in a S76)! no horizon, rain on the windscreen, extremely difficult to judge closure rate/ROD....max gross no wind....oops...messed that up ...going around now with NO visual cues..IFR at 300ft or less......What are we doing here... 
we are as Special 25 stated.....just bloody public transport...not SAR..
Someone(or two) stated than they couldn't see night flying disappear??????
Why not? What small minds we have!!!!! Good job people thought differently when it came to that small thing called the civil rights movement!!!!!!!!!!!!
and all some want to do is ban night flying offshore as it (as statistics prove) is way more dangerous than day flying!!!!!!!!
Fly safe
PH
we are as Special 25 stated.....just bloody public transport...not SAR..Someone(or two) stated than they couldn't see night flying disappear??????
Why not? What small minds we have!!!!! Good job people thought differently when it came to that small thing called the civil rights movement!!!!!!!!!!!!
and all some want to do is ban night flying offshore as it (as statistics prove) is way more dangerous than day flying!!!!!!!!
Fly safe
PH
Great that you guys do that already - as I said, I am not an offshore pilot.
You are saying that you have an autolevel system coupled to the GPS approach, or does it level at a pre set rad-alt? How does it calculate approaches to ships? Are the ships on the move, or do you get them to stop?
I am with Shawn on the closure issue, and you seem to indicate that you have a "visual" picture from the radar image. So why the unusual accident rate at night? What are the possible solutions?
In throwing out some ideas, I mentioned that the EVS was a critical component to descent or decel past the MAPt. It seems that this would be such a simple and cheap addition to the visual issues, but I dont know how the IR image of the actual area and obstacles compares to the radar image.
If we could make the end of the night approach include a display that gives you the actual picture of the situation, it seems that would be the ideal way to go. Thats why I threw the EVS in.
You are saying that you have an autolevel system coupled to the GPS approach, or does it level at a pre set rad-alt? How does it calculate approaches to ships? Are the ships on the move, or do you get them to stop?
I am with Shawn on the closure issue, and you seem to indicate that you have a "visual" picture from the radar image. So why the unusual accident rate at night? What are the possible solutions?
In throwing out some ideas, I mentioned that the EVS was a critical component to descent or decel past the MAPt. It seems that this would be such a simple and cheap addition to the visual issues, but I dont know how the IR image of the actual area and obstacles compares to the radar image.
If we could make the end of the night approach include a display that gives you the actual picture of the situation, it seems that would be the ideal way to go. Thats why I threw the EVS in.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some of the accident rate can be likened to pulling your car into your garage, but it's actually not your garage at all... it's a bit different, someone changed the length of the drive, rearranged the gardening equipment, unscrewed the light bulb, and changed the intervals between those little pink flamingos or garden gnomes you use to gauge your speed into the garage. But until close to the garage itself... you still think it IS your garage. And probably some other colorful metaphors (or are those similes... no matter...)
I've no intention of taking a position on whether night flying in the offshore environment should or shouldn't happen (and I've done enough of it to have at least a passing acquaintance with most forms of visual illusions), but every risk management model I'm familiar with includes 'avoid' as a possible method of mitigating risk. It should at the least be considered, so while folks are pushing forward to develop capabilities to fly around the clock (which development is probably positive) it will indeed, at times, be in everybody's best interest to stay in bed. To spring load to 'accept' as a risk mitigation method is to lose the big picture, methinks.
There needs to be a balanced view between training, technology, administrative controls, risk management, and commercial pressure, or it's going to end badly.
I've no intention of taking a position on whether night flying in the offshore environment should or shouldn't happen (and I've done enough of it to have at least a passing acquaintance with most forms of visual illusions), but every risk management model I'm familiar with includes 'avoid' as a possible method of mitigating risk. It should at the least be considered, so while folks are pushing forward to develop capabilities to fly around the clock (which development is probably positive) it will indeed, at times, be in everybody's best interest to stay in bed. To spring load to 'accept' as a risk mitigation method is to lose the big picture, methinks.
There needs to be a balanced view between training, technology, administrative controls, risk management, and commercial pressure, or it's going to end badly.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: all over?
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why not? What small minds we have!!!!! Good job people thought differently when it came to that small thing called the civil rights movement!!!!!!!!!!!!
and all some want to do is ban night flying offshore as it (as statistics prove) is way more dangerous than day flying!!!!!!!!
and all some want to do is ban night flying offshore as it (as statistics prove) is way more dangerous than day flying!!!!!!!!
I cannot quite see the correlation here between the black civil rights movement and night flying!! I am sure they were fighting for the advancement of rights and improving opportunity - not banning things! Gave me a grin anyway! On topic - if we want to be narrow minded then we ban night flying. Is this the correct approach? We can all have opinions on this. We can also accept that our job involves night flying - our customer relies on it. I have done over 30 night decks already this week, and I am quite sure the banning of night flying would have a fairly severe impact on the industry in which we work. We SUPPORT the oil and gas industry, not the other way round. They have a list of requirements and our companies must try and achieve in the safest manner. The oil companies can accept the risk - FACT. Money talks.
Secondly - if we ban night flying, I think many of us will be looking for new jobs, and it certainly will not be good for the industry in general.
Thirdly - where do you draw the line? Do we only fly around day vfr. As mentioned before - 200' cloud base, 1nm viz, no wind is far worse than a good night. So do we ban this as well?
If you dont like flying at night, and you think your operation is unsafe, then speak to the CP, FSO, training manager and try and get things changed. You may have already done this. All of people I work with are happy with our operation and flying at night and we do a lot of it. There are plenty of ways to make night flying safe. I will completely agree that it is more dangerous than day flying, and needs to be more regulated, but I also think it can be done safely with the right aircraft types, and good procedures and the correct limitations. Flying an ARA to a deck at night is not too different to flying one in really ****ty weather, especially with a good AP with level off at mdh. It could be, for example, that we should reduce the number of decks landings in a night, and make each one an ARA when the viz is less than 10k if that helps standardize.
Both the oil companies and our own organizations do need to commit to new equipment though and fork up the cash to enhance our safety.
So - if we want to talk about being open minded, we need to really look outside at the big picture, and not just look at one option. Sure consider it, but look at all others as well. If we cannot get the required technology/aircraft types/safety equipment, then perhaps night flying should be re-examined. See how other operators deal with the problem.
Thread Starter
Some good points HB, and it is excellent to get some view point from the other side of the fence. In response, I'd say, I don't think there is any need to ban night flying, but I would be of the opinion that night deck operations are not safe enough to be justifiable. Whether it be anecdotal, or statistical, landing and to a lesser extent taking-off offshore at night is probably the most dangerous thing we do and has resulted in the greatest number of accidents.
Could I ever see a situation where the oil companies felt that the risks outweighed the value ?? I'm not sure - I certainly don't see why not. I don't think the oil companies get that much value out of night flights, and I think if there was availability of aircraft, they would rather get their crew changes done by mid-afternoon - That was certainly the way it used to work. Unfortunately this then leaves the helicopter operators with a hangar full of aircraft that are being paid off, and insurance costs, just sitting there not earning. I don't think it would change operations significantly to adjust flights for the peak winter months to cover routine crew changes - Shuttles and offshore works programs that typically crew 6am - 6pm - 6am, might be more of an issue.
I think a general ban on offshore night flying (deck ops) might actually be good for crewing levels. We would still need to accomplish these same flights, but would need a 3 or 4 more airframes on the North Sea and the crews to fly them. or just a few extra flights at the weekend. Yes, this will cost money, but against the backdrop of the budgets involved and the investment in safety generally, it isn't a ridiculous suggestion.
Where would I draw the line ? Well, I think we have honed the rules of aviation fantastically over the life of the North Sea, and I think they are generally pitched pretty well. I don't share your opinion regarding IMC approaches to minima although I accept that they can be exciting !! Even going around at 200ft in less than 1km viz, you tend to be able to see the surface, have a well trimmed aircraft and the pilot flying goes from an IFR approach into an IFR go-around. There has not been an accident in this area to my knowledge and I've never felt a high risk factor. I think it is the nature of semi-IFR / VFR flying at night and the changeover between the two that probably accounts for the accident rate.
Where to go from here ??? Yes I have brought up my doubts on a number of occasions but generally fallen on deaf ears. I fear I may not be talking loud enough !! I certainly doubt that the oil companies have ever been consulted and I'm pretty sure they call up 7 stop night shuttles much as they would by day with little consideration as to the added risk - Why should they unless they had been educated so ??
I think the investment in new aircraft should really improve things particularly with the S-92 and EC225. Not sure the S-76C is really going to help too much but at least the power is there even if the view is not significantly improved !!
Is there some compromise - From my opinion, I'm not sure there is. Are things improving ? - Yes. But will they ever be safe enough ?? I don't think so. Not unless I can guarantee to my passengers that subject to no 'extraordinary' event, I can get them to work and home safe. Flying into the water in the dark isn't extraordinary, it would appear to be a statistical happening based simply on the amount of night flying conducted, and whilst based purely on opinion (and some fact) I can't see procedure, training or technology changing that.
Could I ever see a situation where the oil companies felt that the risks outweighed the value ?? I'm not sure - I certainly don't see why not. I don't think the oil companies get that much value out of night flights, and I think if there was availability of aircraft, they would rather get their crew changes done by mid-afternoon - That was certainly the way it used to work. Unfortunately this then leaves the helicopter operators with a hangar full of aircraft that are being paid off, and insurance costs, just sitting there not earning. I don't think it would change operations significantly to adjust flights for the peak winter months to cover routine crew changes - Shuttles and offshore works programs that typically crew 6am - 6pm - 6am, might be more of an issue.
I think a general ban on offshore night flying (deck ops) might actually be good for crewing levels. We would still need to accomplish these same flights, but would need a 3 or 4 more airframes on the North Sea and the crews to fly them. or just a few extra flights at the weekend. Yes, this will cost money, but against the backdrop of the budgets involved and the investment in safety generally, it isn't a ridiculous suggestion.
Where would I draw the line ? Well, I think we have honed the rules of aviation fantastically over the life of the North Sea, and I think they are generally pitched pretty well. I don't share your opinion regarding IMC approaches to minima although I accept that they can be exciting !! Even going around at 200ft in less than 1km viz, you tend to be able to see the surface, have a well trimmed aircraft and the pilot flying goes from an IFR approach into an IFR go-around. There has not been an accident in this area to my knowledge and I've never felt a high risk factor. I think it is the nature of semi-IFR / VFR flying at night and the changeover between the two that probably accounts for the accident rate.
Where to go from here ??? Yes I have brought up my doubts on a number of occasions but generally fallen on deaf ears. I fear I may not be talking loud enough !! I certainly doubt that the oil companies have ever been consulted and I'm pretty sure they call up 7 stop night shuttles much as they would by day with little consideration as to the added risk - Why should they unless they had been educated so ??
I think the investment in new aircraft should really improve things particularly with the S-92 and EC225. Not sure the S-76C is really going to help too much but at least the power is there even if the view is not significantly improved !!
Is there some compromise - From my opinion, I'm not sure there is. Are things improving ? - Yes. But will they ever be safe enough ?? I don't think so. Not unless I can guarantee to my passengers that subject to no 'extraordinary' event, I can get them to work and home safe. Flying into the water in the dark isn't extraordinary, it would appear to be a statistical happening based simply on the amount of night flying conducted, and whilst based purely on opinion (and some fact) I can't see procedure, training or technology changing that.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: all over?
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yep - some good points there, and I hear what you are saying. Oil companies should certainly be the target audience here if you really want to effect change. They will always want the cheapest option, not necessarily the safest unfortunately. However I hear that some of their unions are actually trying to clamp down on the amount of time their employees spend in a heli at night. Ironically this could actually end up increasing the amount of night flying and decks we do. I suppose they see it as reducing the odds of an accident per person, per flight! Changing crewing patterns for the oil companies may be an option, but they will take a hell of a lot of convincing. The main problem will be, as they see it, that at the moment you have a day shift and a night shift. If you change the handover to midday, then everyone is effectively working day and night. Either midday till mid-night or vice-versa. There are rules against this I suspect. There are only so many nights you can work in a set period, sleep patterns etc etc, hence the current handover times. Unions would kick up a huge fuss if this was changed.
However all that being said - it is certainly a topic worth addressing to the oil companies. The S92 and 225 have made huge advancements in safety, especially at night and in poor weather. A good 4 axis AP allows you to fly all the way to MAPt and beyond fully coupled or do a fully coupled go-around (single engine if necessary), with a "go-around" button on the cyclic to activate if all starts going wrong. The aircraft still wont land itself though, but it can get you to a HOGE hover coupled pretty bloody close to the deck if need be.
However all that being said - it is certainly a topic worth addressing to the oil companies. The S92 and 225 have made huge advancements in safety, especially at night and in poor weather. A good 4 axis AP allows you to fly all the way to MAPt and beyond fully coupled or do a fully coupled go-around (single engine if necessary), with a "go-around" button on the cyclic to activate if all starts going wrong. The aircraft still wont land itself though, but it can get you to a HOGE hover coupled pretty bloody close to the deck if need be.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Quote,::Shuttles and offshore works programs that typically crew 6am - 6pm - 6am, might be more of an issue.::
Crewing may start at these times but more often then not by the time shuttles are finished its 3 hours later, and well into the 'Dark hours'
Crewing may start at these times but more often then not by the time shuttles are finished its 3 hours later, and well into the 'Dark hours'
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Ban Don Ling
Posts: 244
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me get this right then; you asked us for the all singing all dancing machine which we've now procured for you, given you half the year off, and now you want to stay at home all night as well. Sure, but here's a third of your salary pay cut as you no longer need to face that 'special' dangerous helicopter exposure thing you were always blathering on about .....
Always thought that and foul weather approaches were the joy of being a driver ....
By the way, outside of Europe many oil companies do discourage night ops ....
Always thought that and foul weather approaches were the joy of being a driver ....
By the way, outside of Europe many oil companies do discourage night ops ....
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: UK.
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Horror Box..
"Off topic - Oh that is good!!! I cannot quite see the correlation here between the black civil rights movement and night flying!! I am sure they were fighting for the advancement of rights and improving opportunity - not banning things! Gave me a grin anyway!"
"On topic - if we want to be narrow minded then we ban night flying. Is this the correct approach?"
Well, off topic, I think you know what I meant...the people fighting for improvement in the civil rights movement were fighting the Government,public and private institutions,the Law etc etc..a massive uphill struggle..but didn't give up...
All we are trying to do is fight to ban a totally unsafe practise for public transport, mainly on the North sea as Tistisnot states that outside of Europe it is actually discouraged!!! Not really a big deal or a huge uphill struggle if we put our minds to it....narrow minded or sensible???
Trying to improve safety isn't narrow minded, and you can have all the equipment in the world, all the bells and whistles,but human error at night offshore will beat it everytime...the accident at Morcombe bay(I know the final report isn't yet published) but do you think some new type of gps guided approach with some sort of vasi or lighting system system on a rig, or anything else would have helped that night on the GA????
Human error rules, Bottom Line, and at night in poor vis,our senses just do not work well enough...
Fly safe
PH.
"Off topic - Oh that is good!!! I cannot quite see the correlation here between the black civil rights movement and night flying!! I am sure they were fighting for the advancement of rights and improving opportunity - not banning things! Gave me a grin anyway!"
"On topic - if we want to be narrow minded then we ban night flying. Is this the correct approach?"
Well, off topic, I think you know what I meant...the people fighting for improvement in the civil rights movement were fighting the Government,public and private institutions,the Law etc etc..a massive uphill struggle..but didn't give up...
All we are trying to do is fight to ban a totally unsafe practise for public transport, mainly on the North sea as Tistisnot states that outside of Europe it is actually discouraged!!! Not really a big deal or a huge uphill struggle if we put our minds to it....narrow minded or sensible???
Trying to improve safety isn't narrow minded, and you can have all the equipment in the world, all the bells and whistles,but human error at night offshore will beat it everytime...the accident at Morcombe bay(I know the final report isn't yet published) but do you think some new type of gps guided approach with some sort of vasi or lighting system system on a rig, or anything else would have helped that night on the GA????Human error rules, Bottom Line, and at night in poor vis,our senses just do not work well enough...
Fly safe
PH.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: all over?
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the accident at Morcombe bay(I know the final report isn't yet published) but do you think some new type of gps guided approach with some sort of vasi or lighting system system on a rig, or anything else would have helped that night on the GA????
On an S92 you can fly the entire approach coupled, with FMS and Radar if you wish, and also a go-around if you wish. There is actually no-need for the pilot to touch the controls until he is happy to land. He can set the RADALT hold to maintain MDHor whatever height you wish to fly, fly coupled flt at 60kts, with NAV hold on the programmed cse, or HDG hold. in If not happy hit the go-around button, and let the AP fly the go around procedure, with either NAV or HDG. The AP coupled to FMS will also fly a perfect, wind corrected race track if you wish, setting you up on finals, into wind. There are many options, and I have to say I dont use that much, but on bad nights certainly it means you can be more "monitoring" than flying until the later stage.
I am starting to get the impression that your views are based on a limited number of aircraft, most likely the S76. I dont mean to sound patronizing, but I maintain my standpoint, that with more modern aircraft and systems the safety factor at night is greatly increased. Do you also want to ban flying DAY IFR ARA's? Not a huge difference from a good night as I have stated many times already, and you still have no response to that. Night flying can be done safely, and is being done safely. Sorry if that is not the case in your operation.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Horror Box:
the problem with any system (even the S-92's) is that you have to know what it is that it's actually doing.
It will fly a wind corrected race track pattern - but for the wind it knows exists at the time the race track was asked for (or some other time). We know there are significant wind shifts from as low as 500' to the surface - wind shifts that can be of great significance for a helicopter coming in to the hover, or trying to land on a deck.
Without some other precision guidance with respect to closure rate to the thing you're landing on, this system could come up and really bite you.
Wouldn't it be nice to have precision (i.e. ILS quality) guidance to touchdown, and also have an airspeed system that worked under 40 KIAS to tell you the real wind???
the problem with any system (even the S-92's) is that you have to know what it is that it's actually doing.
It will fly a wind corrected race track pattern - but for the wind it knows exists at the time the race track was asked for (or some other time). We know there are significant wind shifts from as low as 500' to the surface - wind shifts that can be of great significance for a helicopter coming in to the hover, or trying to land on a deck.
Without some other precision guidance with respect to closure rate to the thing you're landing on, this system could come up and really bite you.
Wouldn't it be nice to have precision (i.e. ILS quality) guidance to touchdown, and also have an airspeed system that worked under 40 KIAS to tell you the real wind???
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: all over?
Posts: 250
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shawn, I totally agree. No real comeback from me there on the idea of ILS like guidance or some sort of PAPI like setup. That would certainly be great.
As far as the system in the 92 regarding racetrack patterns - it was probably not the best example for me to use and detracted somewhat from the debate. It is something really only applicable for holding, but may have use elsewhere. The system can however calculate and update the wind constantly itself, therefore correcting. So in NAV mode it automatically flies track corrected for wind. That is not to say however, that it is always 100% but it is pretty damn good. The track is very easily monitored using the NDB on the rig and the GPS. My personal preference is to use HDG or NAV though, and I have only used the holding patterns for training. One could, without too much difficulty, devise a standard night poor weather approach procedure, which could be flown entirely coupled until a MAPt if required. A modified ARA, with a track straight to a FAP 3-5 miles d/w, allowing you to fly fully coupled with NAV to that point, then letting down to mdh, inbound at 60kts. Coupled with IAS, NAV/HDG, RALT/ALT, and the go-around track briefed, with ALTP set to climb away ht. Time consuming, but a variation of this may work. This in conjunction with some form of better approach guidance for the latter stages would be a good combination. This would have implications on those of us flying 15 night decks in one shuttle though.
As far as the system in the 92 regarding racetrack patterns - it was probably not the best example for me to use and detracted somewhat from the debate. It is something really only applicable for holding, but may have use elsewhere. The system can however calculate and update the wind constantly itself, therefore correcting. So in NAV mode it automatically flies track corrected for wind. That is not to say however, that it is always 100% but it is pretty damn good. The track is very easily monitored using the NDB on the rig and the GPS. My personal preference is to use HDG or NAV though, and I have only used the holding patterns for training. One could, without too much difficulty, devise a standard night poor weather approach procedure, which could be flown entirely coupled until a MAPt if required. A modified ARA, with a track straight to a FAP 3-5 miles d/w, allowing you to fly fully coupled with NAV to that point, then letting down to mdh, inbound at 60kts. Coupled with IAS, NAV/HDG, RALT/ALT, and the go-around track briefed, with ALTP set to climb away ht. Time consuming, but a variation of this may work. This in conjunction with some form of better approach guidance for the latter stages would be a good combination. This would have implications on those of us flying 15 night decks in one shuttle though.
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Below Escape Velocity
Posts: 416
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Could always put a 'meatball' on the rigs... of course, the cost might be excruciating, and of course, you'd need competency on the rigs to determine the wind (more difficult in practice than one might think) appropriate approach heading (and are you willing to leave that to the rig) and redirect the thing (with all that entails) accordingly... and operating/maintaining it (or any other rig-based aviation equipment) in the 3rd world... well, that's all I'm saying... and that's only for glideslope in visual conditions... and doesn't assist in the management of closure rate...
Shawn-
Surely something out there for hover/low speed wind info is at least as accurate as the OADS (Omnidirectional Air Data System) we had in the HH-65A.
Shawn-
Surely something out there for hover/low speed wind info is at least as accurate as the OADS (Omnidirectional Air Data System) we had in the HH-65A.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Philadelphia PA
Age: 73
Posts: 1,835
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
Un ...Lifting
Glad to see someone else liked that piece of equipment. And it was out 20+ years ago...
Used to be able to hover at 5,000' AGL with the thing (zero airspeed hover at that).
Glad to see someone else liked that piece of equipment. And it was out 20+ years ago...
Used to be able to hover at 5,000' AGL with the thing (zero airspeed hover at that).
Thread Starter
Air Accidents Investigation: G-BLUN Report Sections
The report into the Morcambe Bay tragedy has been published - See the other thread for responses regarding that incident.
But it does prove a lot of what we have talked about on this thread. Namely, experience doesn't count for much, anyone can be caught out. Night flying isn't a science, what can work for one approach one night, won't work for another. Visual cues are not there and disorientation can happen quickly with the other crew member not necessarily aware of your problem and potentially not able to establish safe control.
This report makes for very sad reading as many reading this thread are North Sea pilots who feel they have been close to that situation - But this is more than just a statistic, you can read their words, see their thought process, and who amongst us can say "that could never happen to me" ?
The report into the Morcambe Bay tragedy has been published - See the other thread for responses regarding that incident.
But it does prove a lot of what we have talked about on this thread. Namely, experience doesn't count for much, anyone can be caught out. Night flying isn't a science, what can work for one approach one night, won't work for another. Visual cues are not there and disorientation can happen quickly with the other crew member not necessarily aware of your problem and potentially not able to establish safe control.
This report makes for very sad reading as many reading this thread are North Sea pilots who feel they have been close to that situation - But this is more than just a statistic, you can read their words, see their thought process, and who amongst us can say "that could never happen to me" ?
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Norfolk
Age: 85
Posts: 298
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread has covered the problems of big helicopter night flying very well. My worry is that night training for PPL & CPL night ratings is almost invariably carried out to airfields and mostly to lit runways because these are the only places approved for night training. The navigation is inevitably done on good nights when there is a high probability of a visible horizon. Combine all this with the fact that instrument flying training is carried out using hoods or foggles without the cockpit being screened, means that people at the low experience end of the market have never been truly exposed to the realities of night flying when circumstances apply pressure to go as opposed to when you have the ability to choose your night.