NVGs at the boat?

[ChuckM]

Apparently there is an NVD compatible SGSI in the works. The running joke among FRS IPs is to "just fly the dark green/light green interface for glide slope."

The HSM FRS syllabus has shifted to do all night flights, including DLQs, aided with the only exception being FAM-6N. This is in keeping with the concept that day is day, night is night, and there's no good reason to fly at night without NVDs with the exception being a lightening storm. Also, with many of our flight profiles taking place under the "keyhole" at ~150 ft. and dip to dip navigation at 150 and 120 kts it ads a bit of a safety buffer to have visual cues.

This is a sharp departure from how the last of the LAMPS/HSL guys (like myself) were raised. I was taught that NVDs are a crutch as a young H2P. (Quick caveat: that was in Japan and like everything else FDNF change occurs at a snails pace.) I also blame the cockpit layout and mission set of the Bravo for slow adaptation. It wasn't fun staring at the MPD for three hours with five extra lbs on your head.

Most FRS instructors are coming back from the fleet with close to 75% of their night time on goggles. Most would be somewhat uncomfortable going to the back of the boat un aided on a shitty night.

 

[Pags]

The running joke among FRS IPs is to "just fly the dark green/light green interface for glide slope."

Or just look at the boat through the NVDs and fly the glideslope like the bubbas who land on boats without SGSIs.

 

[ChuckM]

Or just look at the boat through the NVDs and fly the glideslope like the bubbas who land on boats without SGSIs.

I never said it was a good joke.

I actually always flew the numbers and leveled off with rad alt around 50-60 ft and drove it in... Apparently the new SGSI is using steady lights if on glide slope and flashing if low or something along those lines. But yeah, they're pretty overrated IMHO.

 

[Pags]

I never said it was a good joke.

I actually always flew the numbers and leveled off with rad alt around 50-60 ft and drove it in... Apparently the new SGSI is using steady lights if on glide slope and flashing if low or something along those lines. But yeah, they're pretty overrated IMHO.

I just found that a lot of HSL guys were very dogmatic about it and other communities either didn't stress it (HSC) or maybe didn't even know about it (USMC*) yet everyone still managed to get the wheels in the blocks.

*LHDs don't have SGSIs. I don't know if LPD/LSDs have SGSIs.

 

[Jim123]

I just found that a lot of HSL guys were very dogmatic about it and other communities either didn't stress it (HSC) or maybe didn't even know about it (USMC*) yet everyone still managed to get the wheels in the blocks.

*LHDs don't have SGSIs. I don't know if LPD/LSDs have SGSIs.

It's a good tool to have as you transition from the TACAN approach (or the ELVA, riiight) because it complements the drop lights. Put together they did a pretty good job at doing what they were designed to do and it's a shame that not all ships got them. NVGs but no visual glideslope aid are better though. And none of that changes the importance of a good integrated scan on a bad night.

 

[Hotdogs]

Could never imagine flying a visual approach with out goggles on at night. IFR with out goggles - okay....but any time my skids are touching the deck my goggles probably going to be on. There is an unaided portion of the CQ syllabus that requires an unaided approach or two (IIRC) but other than that it's considered unheard of in the USMC to fly an approach unaided. Pinky time is the only time where is may or may not be worth it - depending on the ambient lighting and enviromentals.

 

[RobLyman]

Great discussion. We never had goggles when I left the HSL community way back when. Flash forward to now and all I have to have is 1 hour of night unaided every 6 months for currency. But I need 9 hours of NVG every 6 months. I have now landed a Blackhawk on a small deck at night with NVGs and I prefer it to the unaided landings I did in the Seahawk. BUT, the landings in the Blackhawk were in Pensacola Bay and the Seahawk landings were real out-to-sea landings, so it is a little apples to oranges comparison.

I think there is some benefit to being able to fly unaided, such as in the vicinity of BRIGHT cultural lighting. Downtown Jacksonville is a good example. There's a good chance that landing unaided at Shands Hospital pad at night will be easier unaided. Although it is more of a National Guard type mission, I have dropped a patient off at Shands as a Seahawk pilot in the late 80s. So it's a rare, but not unheard type of mission in the Navy.

 

[Gatordev]

The NVG kit in the 60B was, to put it kindly, asinine. Somehow the world's most powerful navy couldn't procure green lightbulbs in all the right sizes.

A good example of a simple fix that never happened.I remember the joy of flying an HH and not have to carry a bag of blue glass to the plane. The question is whether the squadrons asked for a solution via a narg type process or it was deemed acceptable to buy blue glass in lieu of light bulbs. I don't know the backstory.

Some Bravos did eventually get green instrument lights. Instead of changing the post light bulbs, they were replaced with a "frame" that went around each instrument and radiated light from the bottom. They were wired to the standard "Flight Lights" rheostat, so turning them on and off was like normal. They weren't quite as bright as the white light, so at dusk it was a little harder to see.

I don't know how many 60Bs were converted, but I believe it was quite a few. We got ours done separately to coincide with our HUD installs.

Ah, the ol SGSI argument.

SGSI was designed to be a landing aid in lieu of seeing the boat. old HSL doctrine calls for the use of the SGSI. New NVDs allow for a visual approach but not the use of the SGSI. Therefore, we should doff our new fangled technology and use the old ways.

Or just turn off the SGSI. But that's just crazy talk.

There's a generation of pilots that never used the SGSI because they grew up with just NVD approaches. There was also a good number of those of us before that generation that never used because it was far less precise than shooting the old school standard approach (and/or the SGSI was always broken). Which leads me to...

Or just look at the boat through the NVDs and fly the glideslope like the bubbas who land on boats without SGSIs.

Again, procedures changed. With Superhawk, you could get away with just looking at the ship since the approach didn't really start until .5 DME. At .5, even a FFG on a dark night is slightly more than a dot and by .3, it's large enough to fly off of.

However, the original approach had you start at 1.2 DME. If you tried to fly it visually, even on goggles, you could quickly get yourself settling into the black hole, as the ship is nothing more than a (at best) amber/red dot.

Again, I say all of this as someone who was never a fan and barely a user of the SGSI, just giving some perspective. After settling into the black hole one scary night as a new H2P, I would always just use my 400/1.2, 350/1.0, 275/.7, etc numbers and they kept me dry while also identifying when my copilot might getting off profile to the point of a positive correction/control swap.

 

[Gatordev]

I think there is some benefit to being able to fly unaided, such as in the vicinity of BRIGHT cultural lighting. Downtown Jacksonville is a good example.

Single biggest reason why I won't goggle up sometimes when just staying local and it's towards the end of the flight when it's actually dark enough. That and I think Mayport is incapable of setting their lights lower than the "white dwarf star" setting.

 

[SynixMan]

I've never flown the 60 at night without goggles

(Nothing specifically to you, just a general thing I notice with HS/HSC) I agree 95% of the time NVGs are better than not, but everyone should try unaided at times in a semi controlled environment to stay proficient.

Same/same for purposely doing an instrument hop into the clouds. I recently flew with a senior H2P who hadn't flown actual IMC since HTs. To say they were "rusty" would be an understatement. Hell, I wasn't that great either. Better to find out then than a stormy night behind the boat.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Jeez I forget how we didn't kill ourselves doing open ocean, no moon, low level BI - 175' Radalt (10/20/30 AOB for 90, 180, 360 degrees), and vertical S1's from 300' to 150' AGL Radalt.

 

[Rocketman]

Harrier guys use them at the boat.

 

[wlawr005]

Jeez I forget how we didn't kill ourselves doing open ocean, no moon, low level BI - 175' Radalt (10/20/30 AOB for 90, 180, 360 degrees), and vertical S1's from 300' to 150' AGL Radalt.

Sounds awful.

 

[ChuckMK23]

Sounds awful.

Unaided - yes it was pucker tightening.

 

[wlawr005]

(Nothing specifically to you, just a general thing I notice with HS/HSC) I agree 95% of the time NVGs are better than not, but everyone should try unaided at times in a semi controlled environment to stay proficient.

Same/same for purposely doing an instrument hop into the clouds. I recently flew with a senior H2P who hadn't flown actual IMC since HTs. To say they were "rusty" would be an understatement. Hell, I wasn't that great either. Better to find out then than a stormy night behind the boat.

Since my transition from helos to fixed wing, it's very interesting to note the fundamental differences inherent in the communities. Quite literally what one community takes for granted is another community's helmet fire. Not firing shots, actually the opposite. I enjoy the different perspective. Flying VFR in an airspace like -2508 or around NJK is very challenging to me as a fixed wing guy. Maybe not challenging, but it's definately a situation where I have the least amount of experience and pay extra attention to what I'm doing.

I remember as a helo dude VFR was norm and IFR was scary. Now I feel like it's the opposite. Especially considering the worst leans I ever had was the one time I was IMC in a helo, the tip path really messed me up.