Landing without landing light

[Shadrach]

2 hours ago, bradp said:

I wouldn’t advise doing anything you find risky even with an instructor on board if you are the PIC.  If not you’re a willing passenger. 

I did a BFR at night including unusual attitudes under the hood.  That was a valuable training experience.

I find inverted spins to be uncomfortable and risky. I would not attempt to do them on my own. However, I would feel acceptably comfortable attempting them with the right instructor on board. Obviously, I'm not talking about mooney flying. A good intstructor's primary goal is to keep one safe while one figures out how to do something one doesn't yet know how to do...or has forgotten. Coaching, advice and direction is secondary to that primary function. 

Edited October 31, 2017 by Shadrach

[N201MKTurbo]

21 minutes ago, bradp said:

I wouldn’t advise doing anything you find risky even with an instructor on board if you are the PIC.  If not you’re a willing passenger. 

I did a BFR at night including unusual attitudes under the hood.  That was a valuable training experience.

When I bought my current Mooney it was terribly out of rig. The yokes were about 20 degrees to the right for straight and level. I needed a BFR and the only time my instructor was available was after dark so we did it at night. He asked for a departure stall and I did one. The plane snap rolled inverted. After I got it right side up again. I told him that we weren't doing any more stalls. I started work on the rigging the next day.

[Tommy]

19 hours ago, Shadrach said:

What exactly is it that you find difficult about night flight?

This http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/20-things-you-may-not-know-about-night-flying/

And the statistics 

" Accident statistics suggest that flying by night accounts for about 10% of the general aviation accidents, but 30% of the fatalities. That suggests night flying must be inherently more dangerous than aviating when the sun is up."

What I don't quite understand is why some MSers asks for advice on whether or not one should willingly do something to increase the risk of flight operation. 

 

 

[Shadrach]

On 10/27/2017 at 6:57 PM, Mooneymite said:

For me, the question is moot.

Unless there is operational necessity (i.e. an emergency) I choose not to fly single engine at night with, or without lights.

That's for private pilots and the young and/or bold pilots.  

 

Nice dig. I didn't know you were in the running for resident curmudgeon. I'll try to keep my single engine night operations off of your lawn.

Edited November 1, 2017 by Shadrach

[Shadrach]

3 hours ago, Tommy said:

This http://www.planeandpilotmag.com/article/20-things-you-may-not-know-about-night-flying/

And the statistics 

" Accident statistics suggest that flying by night accounts for about 10% of the general aviation accidents, but 30% of the fatalities. That suggests night flying must be inherently more dangerous than aviating when the sun is up."

What I don't quite understand is why some MSers asks for advice on whether or not one should willingly do something to increase the risk of flight operation. 

 

 

Yes, the stats are indisputable, night flying involves greater risk as well operational challenges in the event of an emergency. I don't think anyone has suggested anything to the contrary.  The linked article discusses ways to mitigate the previously mentioned risks.   I don't think anybody would dispute that it's a good idea to go to mitigate risk whenever possible. 

But....risk is not what I asked you about. I asked you what you found difficult about night flying. Rather than answer that question, you answered a different one. This is not an argument (at least not to me), so there's nothing to "win" and no need to employ the old strawman tactic stand by.

Consider the NHTSA stats for night driving in the US.  The fatal accident rate is 30% higher in spite of the fact that there are 60% less drivers on the road. The danger delta shifting from day to night operations is much greater in a car than in GA. Though the risk is greater and one should employ operational changes to increase margins, is driving at night more difficult? All other things being equal, I don't think it is.

 

[Tommy]

39 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Yes, the stats are indisputable, night flying involves greater risk as well operational challenges in the event of an emergency. I don't think anyone has suggested anything to the contrary.  The linked article discusses ways to mitigate the previously mentioned risks.   I don't think anybody would dispute that it's a good idea to go to mitigate risk whenever possible. 

But....risk is not what I asked you about. I asked you what you found difficult about night flying. Rather than answer that question, you answered a different one. This is not an argument (at least not to me), so there's nothing to "win" and no need to employ the old strawman tactic stand by.

Consider the NHTSA stats for night driving in the US.  The fatal accident rate is 30% higher in spite of the fact that there are 60% less drivers on the road. The danger delta shifting from day to night operations is much greater in a car than in GA. Though the risk is greater and one should employ operational changes to increase margins, is driving at night more difficult? All other things being equal, I don't think it is.

 

Err...I think you already answered your own question. Why is night flying difficult? Because it's risky. Why is it risky? Many reasons and the stats proves it. Risky operation is just another way of saying it's a difficult operation. 

There is no straw man here. Just simple logics. 

A straw man would be to insinuate that indiviudal who doesn't advocate flying in night without a working landing light is simply not good enough of a pilot ("what is it you have trouble with night flying?")   It's precisely this kind of thinking that gets pilots killed. 

[Mooneymite]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

Nice dig. I didn't know you were in the running for resident curmudgeon. I'll try to keep my single engine night operations off of your lawn.

Yeah...at my age, I feel everyone should be in bed asleep by 8 PM.  No time for flying in the dark.  Now getting up early in the dark; that's another thing.  

[Shadrach]

2 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Err...I think you already answered your own question. Why is night flying difficult? Because it's risky. Why is it risky? Many reasons and the stats proves it. Risky operation is just another way of saying it's a difficult operation. 

There is no straw man here. Just simple logics. 

A straw man would be to insinuate that indiviudal who doesn't advocate flying in night without a working landing light is simply not good enough of a pilot ("what is it you have trouble with night flying?")   It's precisely this kind of thinking that gets pilots killed. 

 I asked what you found difficult about night flying because your statement indicated it was difficult. No answer to the direct question.

To your first...er...uh point, risk does not equal difficulty. They are not the same thing. They are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but they're not necessarily correlated either.

Surfing a beach in water with no history of Great White Shark activity is no more or less difficult than surfing a beach that's known to be located in Great White Breeding area. The over all risk of attack is likely still small, but the change in risk as a percentage is greater. The difficulty is unchanged.  

As to my attitude about landing lights killing pilots. I don't think that there's any accident data that points to landing light use or lackthereof being a significant cause of accidents. If there is, please enlighten us all. Until then, it's merely your opinion. I think your opinion is long on antagonism and sohpistry yet short on reason and information, but hey everyone has there strengths.        

It's legal to operate without a light and up until recently, incandescent lights (unreliable when subject to vibration) were the only game in town. Every landing light I've ever had was flown to failure (usually between 25 and 75hrs service) many of those failures occurred at night and yet I've lived to tell the tales...because it's a non issue. It does increase the risk that you won't see the deer that you run over on roll out

 

 

[N201MKTurbo]

The difficulty may be connected to the constant fear of the risk.

[gsxrpilot]

3 hours ago, Shadrach said:

Until then, it's merely your opinion. I think your opinion is long on antagonism and sohpistry yet short on reason and information, but hey everyone has there strengths

Don't feed the trolls 

[Shadrach]

3 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

The difficulty may be connected to the constant fear of the risk.

There is some truth to what you say. I know that having an instructor on board is almost always detrimental to performance. The risk of the instructor witnessing poor performance flusters people into performing poorly... it's amazing how many gear up landing occur with an instructor in the right seat.

Edited November 1, 2017 by Shadrach

[Shadrach]

19 minutes ago, gsxrpilot said:

Don't feed the trolls 

Someone must...most of the folks that used to throw him scraps have now blocked him.

Edited November 1, 2017 by Shadrach

[Tommy]

21 hours ago, Shadrach said:

 I asked what you found difficult about night flying because your statement indicated it was difficult. No answer to the direct question.

To your first...er...uh point, risk does not equal difficulty. They are not the same thing. They are not necessarily mutually exclusive, but they're not necessarily correlated either.

Surfing a beach in water with no history of Great White Shark activity is no more or less difficult than surfing a beach that's known to be located in Great White Breeding area. The over all risk of attack is likely still small, but the change in risk as a percentage is greater. The difficulty is unchanged.  

As to my attitude about landing lights killing pilots. I don't think that there's any accident data that points to landing light use or lackthereof being a significant cause of accidents. If there is, please enlighten us all. Until then, it's merely your opinion. I think your opinion is long on antagonism and sohpistry yet short on reason and information, but hey everyone has there strengths.        

It's legal to operate without a light and up until recently, incandescent lights (unreliable when subject to vibration) were the only game in town. Every landing light I've ever had was flown to failure (usually between 25 and 75hrs service) many of those failures occurred at night and yet I've lived to tell the tales...because it's a non issue. It does increase the risk that you won't see the deer that you run over on roll out

 

 

Did you even read the article that I had referenced? Why is it difficult? Gosh, where do I start? Visibility? Fatigue? Somatographical disorienation? Higher risk of inadvertent IMC? Lack of options with catastrophic emergencies? The list goes on and on...

If it's not difficult, why do we need another rating to fly at night (some countries even asks for IR)? Why the statistics (The EVIDENCE you asked for)? 

I don't have specific evidence re: landing lights but neither do you have any evidence to say that, for example, anti-collision lights actually prevented collisions at night but it's a reuqirement based on common sense. 

What I lack in specific evidence, I made it up in overall evidence - there are more accidents in night relatively speaking. 

You, on the other hand, don't have anything to argue otherwise so please shut up about "flying at night is not difficult" crap as if you are the night owl hot shot.

And tell me why is it that it's a legal requirement when the aircraft is for hire? Why the Moon shines brighter when a rental plane is flying? 

Edited November 2, 2017 by Tommy

[Shadrach]

20 hours ago, Tommy said:

Did you even read the articles that I referenced? Why is it difficult? Gosh, where do I start? Visibility? Fatigue? Somatographical disoriebnation? Higher risk of inadvertent IMC? Lack of options with catastrophic emergencies? The list goes on and on...

If it's not difficult, why do we need another rating to fly at night? Why the statistics (The EVIDENCE you asked for)? 

I don't have specific evidence re: landing lights but neither do you have any evidence to say that anti-collision lights actually prevented collisions at night but it's a reuqirement based on common sense. 

What I lack in specific evidence, I made it up in overall evidence - there are more accidents in night relatively speaking. 

You, on the other hand, don't have anything to argue otherwise so please shut up about "flying at night is not difficult" crap as if you are the night owl hot shot.

"Long on antagnism and sophistry" Ad hominem - common tactics when one is losing the argument. 

Perhaps I am just more comfortable flying at night because I'm accustomed to doing it. Though I don't find it difficult, the risks still frighten me when I think about off airport landings or an electrical failure.  According to the stats that you've posted, the fatality rate per accident goes up at night; there is nothing posted related to accidents per hours flown (though I'd not be surprised at an increase). There may or may not be more accidents per hours flown but your stats don't address that, and my guess is it would be an impossible number to generate. You've inferred something from the stats that they don't say. My contention has been that night flying is not particularly difficult not there aren't additional challenges, but relative to the overall activity of flying, it's just another factor that needs to be accounted for. 

Anti collision lights reveal the orientation of other aircraft in the sky. Without them, one would not know if they were same direction as traffic or closing head on. They are required equipment though operations can be conducted to the next destination if one is burned out. You comparing them to non required equipment is an example of your attempts to use sophistry (albeit poorly) in your arguments.

I don't really care why Australia requires an additional rating. It's your nanny state, not mine. We have night requirements for the private pilot rating that are regulatory. A good deal of instruction and solo flight is accomplished after dark if the student has met those requirements.

This whole thing spiraled from me asking you to clarify what you found difficult about night flying. It was a personal question and in spite of all of your links and statistics, the question remains unanswered. You've tried to paint me as a cowboy for illustrating that operating sans landing light is legal and for suggesting it's a non event. I know it's a non event based on experience. My Instructor made me do it, repeatedly, because he knew that landing lights fail and panicking over it would be detrimental to performance. 

I've done my best to explain my statements, and I have asked you questions. I have also addressed your statements. I stand by my previous assessment of your posting style and will ad to that assessment that you don't really know what ad hominem means.

Please enjoy taking the last word, I'm ashamed of myself for engaging you as much as I did.

 

Edited November 3, 2017 by Shadrach

[Tommy]

1 hour ago, Shadrach said:

 

Please enjoy taking the last word, I'm ashamed of myself for engaging you as much as I did.

 

Honestly I am not sure what's wrong with you guys can't take a heated discussion on the internet? Why is it so butt hurt for you guys to be questioned, challenged, or even insulted ONLINE? "Ashamed of yourself?" Get a grip on life, bud. Gosh, I am reluctant to imagine what you guys are like taking criticisms in real life. 

Now tell me why is it that landing light is a legal requirement when the aircraft is for hire? Why the Moon shines brighter when a rental plane is flying? 

Edited November 2, 2017 by Tommy

[Tommy]

22 minutes ago, Shadrach said:

Anti collision lights reveal the orientation of other aircraft in the sky. Without them, one would not know if they were same direction as traffic or closing head on. They are required equipment though operations can be conducted to the next destination if one is burned out. You comparing them to non required equipment is an example of your attempts to use sophistry (albeit poorly) in your arguments.

Read my statement closely, I said there is no specific evidence to say anti-collison light prevented any collisions and it's simply a common sense thing as a response to your statement that there is no specific evidence of taking off without landing lights caused any accidents. 

It's just a common sense NOT to introduce another hole in your swiss cheese. 

Edited November 2, 2017 by Tommy

[Mooneymite]

39 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Honestly I am not sure what's wrong with you guys can't take a heated discussion on the internet? Why is it so butt hurt for you guys to be questioned, challenged, or insulted ONLINE? "Ashamed of yourself?"

Because most of us are married.  If we want to be questioned, challenged, or insulted, we can have it from the comfort of our homes.

We come to Mooneyspace to escape that!  Stop spoiling the ambiance.

[Tommy]

35 minutes ago, Mooneymite said:

Because most of us are married.  If we want to be questioned, challenged, or insulted, we can do it from the comfort of our homes.

We come to Mooneyspace to escape that!  Stop spoiling the ambiance.

Oh I am sorry but last time I read the description of this online forum it makes no mention of an orgy sanctuary for those who are maritally challenged... 

 

Edited November 2, 2017 by Tommy

[Mooneymite]

6 minutes ago, Tommy said:

Oh I am sorry but last time I read about the description of this online forum it makes no mention of an orgy sanctuary for those who are maritally challenged... 

 

Perhaps it's only readable to those who have some modicum of social sensitivity?

[Tommy]

Just now, Mooneymite said:

Perhaps it's only readable to those who have some modicum of social sensitivity?

Perhaps it's only readable to those who have some modicum of personal humility? 

[Tommy]

Or maybe just being able to read and understand the terms like "discussion" or "online forum"? 

[Hank]

14 hours ago, Mooneymite said:

 

We come to Mooneyspace to escape that!  Stop spoiling the ambiance.

I find "Ignore User" has restored much of the ambience for me.  

[Bob_Belville]

On 10/27/2017 at 9:27 AM, neilpilot said:

I once arrived at my then-home base and there were no runway lights.  My landing light worked fine.  Should I have attempted to land?....................I decided to divert to a neighboring field.  However, when I was a few miles away the lights went on so I turned back toward my original destination.  Turned out there had been a power outage.

I was doing night currency with an instructor friend - 5 or 6 night takeoffs and landings. Our lights time out 15 minutes after you click them on. The landing that the lights went off while I was on short final was the best landing of the night as judged by my passenger.

OTOH, I've landed more than once, years ago, on a short grass strip surrounded by trees with obstacles at both ends, with no airport lights - NC52 - Silver Creek. Probably wouldn't do that now.

[bradp]

Did Patrick’s accident occur during daylight or at night? This has nothing to do with the Cat fighting above - it is because it’s sometimes darned difficult to see and judge trees or other obstacles at night departing or landing.  Like what Bob is saying above.  

 

For that matter it’s sometimes darned difficult to see obstructions during the day too.  Today clear blue sky there’s a 2000+ ft tower 5 mi east of the airport on the way to the cheap gas Airport.  I knew exactly where the thing was but had to search hard for it for a few minutes to pick it out of the ground clutter.  

 

[Marauder]

Did Patrick’s accident occur during daylight or at night? This has nothing to do with the Cat fighting above - it is because it’s sometimes darned difficult to see and judge trees or other obstacles at night departing or landing.  Like what Bob is saying above.  
 
For that matter it’s sometimes darned difficult to see obstructions during the day too.  Today clear blue sky there’s a 2000+ ft tower 5 mi east of the airport on the way to the cheap gas Airport.  I knew exactly where the thing was but had to search hard for it for a few minutes to pick it out of the ground clutter.  
 

His accident was at night. It was short upslope runway that he didn’t use the entire length of.





Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro