Night VFR is comparable to IMC conditions, you dont see much. If you have an IR, you can always switch to flying by instruments if you lose reference. If you have no IR and lose reference, then you're likely to kill yourself.

That aside, it probably still make sense to do some night flights every once in a while even with IR, at least the cockpit management is definitely a different story at night.

VMC/IMC?
 

Jymil Quote:- "Night VFR is comparable to IMC conditions, you dont see much."

Agreed, as far as an approach is concerned. The landing is quite a different matter.

malabo Quote:-"Curious why if you have an instrument rating you do not need night currency in Europe? I can't figure out what a straight in landing on a IFR runway in the daytime is in any way related to operating a helicopter VFR at night."

Precisely.

EASA haven't grasped this yet, thankfully others have.

EASA = European Aviation SAFETY Agency?????

I'd hasten to say....what a lot of cobblers!

NVFR requires visual conditions plus a landing at night with limited peripheral and spacial references. IFR requires an IMC approach followed by a daytime normal landing: no different to any other day landing apart from the approach.

To think that I had evil thoughts about some of our Australian legislation :hmm:

The final portion of an IFR flight is the same as VFR at night (unless we're talking about CAT3 Autoland). Normally, you land at an airport at night and everything is well-lit there, including an approach lighting system. Usually not a problem for a VFR day pilot.

Off-airport landings are of course a different business, however they are usually prohibited anyway (only allowed for night training here). Some other european countries do not allow Night VFR at all.

I'd suggest that to imply a day landing currency is all you need to operate at night because you have an IR is delusional. I'll show you a dozen airfields within a cooee of me with instrument approaches that have no approach lighting and only minimal airfield lighting. Certainly nothing that even approaches the visual cues that are normal in a day landing, nor enough to give taxiing and hovering cues to take you to your landing point. Primary reference is from the landing lights: not something easily practised during daylight landings ;)

Then what are you going to do when you do some real night flying which doesn't include an instrument approach and lands away from an airfield, eg a minimally lit helipad? :hmm:

Well, looks like we're getting into a "what makes sense" vs "what is legal" discussion here.
Don't forget that you can fly at night as PIC yourself and land at an unlit heliport even if you haven't flown at night in the past 5 years.

That might be delusional, but perfectly legal.

Sensible/Legal
 

jymil Quote:- "Well, looks like we're getting into a "what makes sense" vs "what is legal" discussion here."

So, jymil, are you of the sensible persuassion or are you happy to meet the bare minimum legal requirement?

Being "sensible" should not cost the operator any more money - the cost gets passed on to the client.

Flying into the ground at night might be perfectly legal but not too sensible.

One day the bafoons at EASA might realise this. Thankfully, there are other Organisations and Operators which already do.

I fail to understand how an IR helps if your helicopter is not IFR equipped....? :rolleyes:

I am of the pragmatic sort .. The JAA rule demanding flights on the same type never made sense to me .. Why shouldnt 3 landings in an R22 count for a pax flight with an R44 ? This is however now lifted by EASA for non-complex helicopters.

I personally think flying for half an hour and one landing should suffice to fresh up, doing 3 circuits at night at my home base is extremely difficult because circuits at night are prohibited due to noise abatement.

As for the IR: I can partly see where they are coming from, but it probably still makes sense to fly at night every once in a while. At least that is what I'd do for myself.