Do you think night flying should require a sing-off?

Dr. O said:
Well, I'm going against the crowd here.
Statistically we know that night VFR flight is an extreme risk compared to day VFR flight.
So, on balance I am for having an additional 2 or 3 hours of dual at night before a non IFR certified pilot being signed off for night VFR flight.
Here in Michigan we lose a pilot and passengers now and then at certain airports on the shoreline where within seconds of lifting off the last lights pass under you and you are looking out at a 100 miles of unlighted lake with no horizon and the water being a mirror of the sky. Some don't make it.
Click to expand...
Two or three additional hours of night aren't going to fix that unless the "black hole takeoff" is trained during that period. As I noted in my reply to Kritchlow's post (sorry for misinterpreting his intent, but the comment still applies to the overall discussion), unless the regulating authority specifically requires various types of night operations training, a specific night sign-off isn't going to be any more effective than the implicit night sign-off that exists when you go for your Private Pilot checkride.
 
I will answer the OPs question with a question (or two).

Are YOU smart enough to know that you need more training in a certain area be it night flying or crosswinds or whatever?

Why would you assume other people aren't smart enough and require them to jump through hoops?

ETA: I have been told I have a nice voice. :D
 
You mean TLAs.

THREE LETTER ACRONYMS.
 
DesertNomad said:
After flying with my CFI to KLOL.... Lovelock, NV on a moonless night I said to him that I thought 3 hours were nowhere near enough. It is Dark out there.... No lights at all except for the runway, and obviously no horizon. Plus there are mountains all over the place. People from Nevada and Wyoming will understand... people from New York probably won't.
Click to expand...
Don't be too sure. I can think of runways at 2 different airports in VT that I wouldn't want to depart from at night without following the ODP. Parts of NY are surely not too different.

That said, although I support more night training (and more instrument training!) for PPL candidates on general principle, I don't support more regulation without, as BradZ said, hard data supporting a better safety record.
 
azure said:
Don't be too sure. I can think of runways at 2 different airports in VT that I wouldn't want to depart from at night without following the ODP. Parts of NY are surely not too different.
Click to expand...
Right.. Although not technically NY, the JFK Jr accident happened in that neck of the woods.
 
DesertNomad said:
... people from New York probably won't.
Click to expand...
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

There are some major misconceptions of NY. People really need to distinguish between NY and NYC.

90% (guessing a little here) of NY is VERY rural.

The northern part of NY is mostly wooded wilderness. The Adirondack park is the biggest state park in the country with over 6 million acres.

The SouthernTier of NY is basically all farm country.

NY ranks 25th in the country for food production.

NY ranks 3rd in diary production.

Of course it ranks highest in about every category of taxation too so that is no great stat. :mad2::mad::nono::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:

Where I currently live the closest 3 way stop light is 26 miles away. The closest Walmart is 35 minutes. The closest airport with a paved runway is 30 miles.
 
I did a lot of my PP training in the winter, so I got a lot of night hours.

After my checkride I used to try to do one night flight a month. Then it was every other month, then three. Now I don't remember the last time I flew at night.

If you don't feel comfortable flying at night: 1) don't, there's no shame in that, or 2) get extra training. There are extra risks at night that some of us would rather not deal with.

Isn't relying on the pilot to make a PIC decision better than implementing another set of regs? Isn't that why we train to make those go/no-go decisions?
 
Just because the regulations allow you to do something doesn't mean you should, nor does it mean the regulations should be changed.
 
Kritchlow said:
Right.. Although not technically NY, the JFK Jr accident happened in that neck of the woods.
Click to expand...
Right, though I was thinking specifically of places with terrain issues. NY has the Catskills, and especially the 'Dacks. I haven't landed at any of the upstate mountain fields yet, but I have to imagine that some of them can have a bit of a pucker factor at night, unless you follow instrument procedures.
 
Is there any data that indicates that there have been a number of accidents that may have been prevented by additional regulations and requirements?
If so, then I would support it. If not, then nope.
 
DFH65 said:
I will answer the OPs question with a question (or two).

Are YOU smart enough to know that you need more training in a certain area be it night flying or crosswinds or whatever?

Why would you assume other people aren't smart enough and require them to jump through hoops?

ETA: I have been told I have a nice voice. :D
Click to expand...

Flying at night right now is a little bit intimidating to me. I will be outright honest with you. This is based largely on only having done it twice, and both times were on clear nights in a very well lit area of the country (NJ/NY area). I have not experienced the black hole situation, nor dealt with terrain at night. It is not my fault for that deficiency, but rather a result of where I live. I would love to do mountain training, and would not even think about flying out west without significantly more hours, or that training. I think many new pilots would have similar issues based purely on where they received primary instruction. With crosswinds, I feel fairly confident, but did just elect to delay the flight potion of my checkride do to winds gusting to 26 at a 70 degree crosswind at the airport where all the DPE seem to divert to. So I am acutely aware of my limitations. I could not possible tell anyone else what there limitations are.

I am not advocating jumping through hoops, I personally hate most regulation and deal with an obscene amount of it daily at work. I am thinking about improving my safety, other new pilots safety, and ultimately the publics perceived safety of GA. To be completely honest, I think there are several areas where the PTS should be tougher, or the hour requirement within primary training should be increased. Now, this is less of a factor for people doing commercial training who get that first certificate and immediately move to the next (if they have not been doing it concurrently). So those saying an additional sign off is not needed may be correct, but maybe some of the training standards could be tweaked. The following changes seem reasonable to me.

1. Increase the night requirement
2. I think all pilots should experience a spin, and demonstrate they can recover from it not just describe how.
3. Fly some actual IMC in primary training

I know many may disagree with increasing the standards, but just completing my training, it is clear to me areas where more primary training could make GA safer.
 
The way I see it you can take this to the extreme. Let's face it basic VFR flying is not all that hard. There I said it we are not all superhuman.

If everyone had an instrument rating we would probably be safer and if everyone had commercial training or met the ATP standards before flying we would all be safer.

The idea is to teach you the basics, get you in the air, and for the pilot to be relatively safe. After that it's up to the pilot to decide what else you want to do or need to know based on the type of flying they do and learn it.

I choose not to fly at night. I choose not to fly when the weather is bad. That is me. Other people make other choices.
 
I don't think night flight should require a sign off as an FAA regulation. For the most part, most FBOs I've been to have a night flight sign off any (waived for current IR pilots).

Besides, night flight is different in different areas. Over the urban areas of SoCal there is clearly a horizon and in fact the city lights sometimes illuminate the cabin slightly. Over the desert with some moonlight is also fine. But one thing I could never get myself to do until my IR was flying towards the Pacific Ocean on certain nights. It just turns into a pitch black nothing.
 
DFH65 said:
The way I see it you can take this to the extreme. Let's face it basic VFR flying is not all that hard. There I said it we are not all superhuman.

If everyone had an instrument rating we would probably be safer and if everyone had commercial training or met the ATP standards before flying we would all be safer.

The idea is to teach you the basics, get you in the air, and for the pilot to be relatively safe. After that it's up to the pilot to decide what else you want to do or need to know based on the type of flying they do and learn it.

I choose not to fly at night. I choose not to fly when the weather is bad. That is me. Other people make other choices.
Click to expand...


I understand that one of the main reasons flight training has become compartmentalized is to get people in the air. If we required all pilots to get IFR before they could fly alone, GA would die. It would just take too much time and be too expensive for the person that just wants to fly for fun or do short easy trips.

As of today, and hopefully when I get my PPL on Saturday, I know there are things right now I would not do, and mountains at night is probably top of the list. But I am very conservative when it comes to safety issues. I am also not advocating increasing the standard to the extreme, just exposing people to the things that get pilots killed: spins, VFR into IMC, and flight into terrain (night goes here). If you actually experience them rather than just being told about them, you may be able to deal with it better. I would never expect anybody to be an expert in the 40 to 80 hours it take the average person the learn to fly, but I think there should be more exposure in primary training.
 
JFK Jr. had 310 hours and 55 hours at night. A lot of good it did him.
 
Since nights are one of the difference between sport, recreational, and private. One could already say it is a different sign off.
 
Kritchlow said:
But, when one gets a ppl they are not limited to "night only over Chicago". The new pilot will be authorized to fly over the Everglades as well.
Click to expand...

True, but just because you are authorized to fly over the Everglades at night, doesn't mean one should exercise that right without further instruction. I'm authorized to fly all over the Rocky Mountains (Okie pilot), but I wouldn't do it without some serious instruction. No need to create more limitations when common sense should prevail. If a pilot isn't smart enough to seek instruction when in an unfamiliar area at night, Darwin often helps out.
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
JFK Jr. had 310 hours and 55 hours at night. A lot of good it did him.
Click to expand...

Out of those 310 hours, JFK had about 300 hours dual with a CFII on board nearly every flight.

I fly in my area at night a lot (nearing 100 night hours out of 600 total). West TX/southern NM gets pretty dark. I have 40 hours IR training, but haven't taken the test. Spatial disorientation is easy out here; however, flying IFR (I follow roads) at night in the desert is very easy ... and in my area, there are no power or telephone lines adjacent to the highway(s).

I think night flying in the east, with trees etc. would be much more difficult than my area if you need a place to land fast. As for disorientation, that'd happen quicker for you in my area;)
 
I am a much better pilot at night time with my IR than I was before. Flying an Instrument Approach at night has made it much safer and easier for me with the terrain I fly in. I have also departed on VFR nights so dark that you had to fly by the instruments. I'm not for any more regulations, but new pilots should be very cautious when making the decision to fly at night.
 
For those of you that do think it should require an additional sign off, can you explain why an easier, less risky mode of flight is worthy of such a designation?
 
It's more than I had before I made my first night solo flight back in the days before the 3-hour/10-landing/100-nm XC night rule came into effect. My night checkout back in 1970 took about an hour and included just some basic maneuvering and half a dozen landings -- no XC at all, and other than the flight school's rules, I could have checked myself out at night. So I think the current requirement is a pretty big improvement on the way it was back then. I'd be interested what that DPE would consider necessary above and beyond 3 hours, 10 takeoffs and landings, and a 100 nm XC flight. Perhaps making it an additional training endorsement like tailwheel, complex, and high performance? I can't say I'd find that onerous, since that could easily be done in 3 hours, 10 takeoffs and landings, and a 100nm XC unless the trainee has some serious fundamental problems which would probably preclude getting signed off for the PPL ride in the first place.
 
Last edited:
personally, I'd consider an instrument rating and some basic instruments (not IFR nav, just aircraft orientation) as minimum requirements for night. But I'd not make that an FAR, it's better left to individual pilots and their insurance companies.
 
DFH65 said:
The way I see it you can take this to the extreme. Let's face it basic VFR flying is not all that hard. There I said it we are not all superhuman.

If everyone had an instrument rating we would probably be safer and if everyone had commercial training or met the ATP standards before flying we would all be safer.

The idea is to teach you the basics, get you in the air, and for the pilot to be relatively safe. After that it's up to the pilot to decide what else you want to do or need to know based on the type of flying they do and learn it.

I choose not to fly at night. I choose not to fly when the weather is bad. That is me. Other people make other choices.
Click to expand...
Interesting that some navy fighter pilots, flying off carriers at night gave been disoriented and crashed, killing themselves and sometimes their rios., etc.others survive and are able to land but are sent to shore for special additional training to prevent this from happening. The average ppl gets very little night time training probably due to the CFI not being all that good at it or being uncomfortable flying at night in a fifty year old trainer. It's easy to become disoriented at night in many parts of the east, ( central penna.for starters, ) etc. I think a few extra hours training would be wise. I have never liked single engine flying at night. If it quits you are in big trouble in most situations. I did it some when young, not any more. ( important to remember that today, many CFIs have little more total time than the student.)
 
DFH65 said:
:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

There are some major misconceptions of NY. People really need to distinguish between NY and NYC.

90% (guessing a little here) of NY is VERY rural.

The northern part of NY is mostly wooded wilderness. The Adirondack park is the biggest state park in the country with over 6 million acres.

The SouthernTier of NY is basically all farm country.

NY ranks 25th in the country for food production.

NY ranks 3rd in diary production.

Of course it ranks highest in about every category of taxation too so that is no great stat. :mad2::mad::nono::mad2::mad2::mad2::mad2:

Where I currently live the closest 3 way stop light is 26 miles away. The closest Walmart is 35 minutes. The closest airport with a paved runway is 30 miles.
Click to expand...

A lot of exciting lives?
 
DFH65 said:
90% (guessing a little here) of NY is VERY rural
Click to expand...

I guess that depends on your definition of rural.

There are places in Nevada where the closest human is 100 miles away. To drive from Tonopah to Ely, there are no towns or services for 160 miles. Is there anywhere in New York where you can drive in a straight line for 160 miles and not pass a town?

35 minutes to Walmart?

It looks like from Tonopah, NV or Ely, NV that Walmart is more than 3 hours away.

Next-gas-167-miles-sign-US6_DSC6502.jpg
 
Last edited:
SixPapaCharlie said:
I do.
I wasn't ready for night flying after the min PPL requirements.

Depending on your location, night is bordering on instrument conditions.
The min for the PPL requirement is low IMO
Click to expand...

I agree with this. I did some more night flying with my CFI post-PPL and the first time I needed to get night current again I took him to dinner and we flew back after dusk and did the required landings. It's still not my favorite thing in the world...as much as I love flying at night.

I landed at KTME at night once taking my Mom home and the north side of that runway has nothing out there for at least a couple miles...at least nothing that lights up. That was as close as I've come to the black hole effect...I don't think I've ever concentrated as hard in my life and I still had a horizon in the backdrop with the Houston city lights, etc... but in my immediate area in front of me there was nothing. Definitely woke me up to how freaky it could be landing out in the middle of nowhere if there was some overcast or the moon wasn't out.
 
DesertNomad said:
I guess that depends on your definition of rural.

There are places in Nevada where the closest human is 100 miles away. To drive from Tonopah to Ely, there are no towns or services for 160 miles. Is there anywhere in New York where you can drive in a straight line for 160 miles and not pass a town?
Click to expand...
It doesn't much matter, does it, whether the closest town is 30 miles away, or 160, if your engine quits at night?

I was never TOO worried about flying at night over SE Michigan. The toughest part about picking out a place to land would have been avoiding buildings and power lines. One could probably fly high enough to always be in glide distance of an airport. Over the New England north country, airports, even farms are few and far between. It's a lot like Michigan's UP in that respect. I'm not as happy about flying at night here, and when I do, I file IFR even for fairly short legs because I want them to be REQUIRED to mount a S&R effort if I go down, and have a reasonable chance of finding me before I die of injuries. Even so, radar coverage over northern Vermont is spotty to non-existent below 5000 or so.

No, it's not the Great Plateau or the Desert Southwest, but it's not civilization either. Try flying over the Presidential Range sometime in a small single. There's a lot of wild country out this way where you do NOT want to go down.
 
danhagan said:
Out of those 310 hours, JFK had about 300 hours dual with a CFII on board nearly every flight.

I fly in my area at night a lot (nearing 100 night hours out of 600 total). West TX/southern NM gets pretty dark. I have 40 hours IR training, but haven't taken the test. Spatial disorientation is easy out here; however, flying IFR (I follow roads) at night in the desert is very easy ... and in my area, there are no power or telephone lines adjacent to the highway(s).

I think night flying in the east, with trees etc. would be much more difficult than my area if you need a place to land fast. As for disorientation, that'd happen quicker for you in my area;)
Click to expand...

In addition, pretty sure JFK was not current to take passengers at night.
 
Last edited:
dmspilot said:
JFK Jr. had 310 hours and 55 hours at night. A lot of good it did him.
Click to expand...

JFK Jr. asked his instructor to go with him. He was unsure of himself. The instructor suggested he scratch the flight as he was unable to go with him due to other commitments. JFK Jr. finally took off much later than intended , causing him to be over open water, in extreme haze as it turned dark. He did not have an instrument ticket and apparently did not know how to engage the auto pilot and climb, call and confess. He could have easily been vectored to Boston had he known how.
 
Re: Do you think night flying should require a sign-off?

Why was he so clueless with 310 hours? Was he not flying often?
 
Jimmy cooper said:
JFK Jr. asked his instructor to go with him. He was unsure of himself. The instructor suggested he scratch the flight as he was unable to go with him due to other commitments. JFK Jr. finally took off much later than intended , causing him to be over open water, in extreme haze as it turned dark. He did not have an instrument ticket and apparently did not know how to engage the auto pilot and climb, call and confess. He could have easily been vectored to Boston had he known how.
Click to expand...

His AI was confirmed to be working. He had very little non-dual time as mentioned above. He was upset/irritated with his wife who he was already having serious marital problems with for showing up hours late after a shopping spree, his CFI did offer to fly with him, he was running late for a function (wedding dinner?), and he took off knowing that there was supposed to be severe haze/fog over the water. He had a serious ankle injury and could not properly work the rudders. He was very new to the plane, and only 2 months into a high-performance endorsement, and estimated only 1 prior landing at night in that type of aircraft. He had already passed his instrument written.

I watched the movie... lol....

Part of me wonders if suicide could have been part of that, as well. He was severely on the rocks with his wife, his magazine was failing miserably, and he was going through a rough patch. But, that's a discussion for a different topic.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top