There is confusion in regard to which "twilight" times are used to
define night flying. What would be wrong with a change to the FARs that
say something like "Flight occuring an hour after GPS-indicated sunset
time and an hour before GPS-indicated sunrise is defined as night
flying"? (The standard exception for Alaska must be included...)

What's wrong with saying "as published in the American Air Almanac"?

Andrew Sarangan wrote:
> What's wrong with saying "as published in the American Air Almanac"?
>

I seem to have misplaced my copy.

On 8 Nov 2005 05:50:19 -0800, "Andrew Sarangan" >
wrote:

>What's wrong with saying "as published in the American Air Almanac"?

1. The American Air Almanac is out of print. It is not available on
amazon.com although it may be available elsewhere. However, it has
certainly not been updated in recent years.

2. If the purpose of night flying regulations is to require the currency
of special skills when it is "dark", then the times should be adjusted to
reflect local topography. For example, ridges and mountains may cause
darkness to be present earlier than the official sunset time.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

> 2. If the purpose of night flying regulations is to require the currency
> of special skills when it is "dark", then the times should be adjusted to
> reflect local topography. For example, ridges and mountains may cause
> darkness to be present earlier than the official sunset time.

I think this is one of those places where judgement comes into play.
We're not talking about much of a temporal difference.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

How about "if it is dark out, it is night"? That is what most pilots
use anyway. Or don't define it at all. Just call it night. People know
what night is. The amount of darkness at night varies quite a bit, BTW.
We all know that too. No moon, no snow, no city lights, yeah that's
DARK. And a lit runway in such an environment can present problems you
don't have in a city, with a moon and lots of nearby lighting.

In article >,
Stubby > wrote:

> There is confusion in regard to which "twilight" times are used to
> define night flying. What would be wrong with a change to the FARs that
> say something like "Flight occuring an hour after GPS-indicated sunset
> time and an hour before GPS-indicated sunrise is defined as night
> flying"? (The standard exception for Alaska must be included...)

1) not everyone has GPS

2) why not use the sunrise/sunset times provided by US Naval Observatory?
(some means will need to be provided for those without internet access)

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

Bob Noel wrote:
> 2) why not use the sunrise/sunset times provided by US Naval Observatory?
> (some means will need to be provided for those without internet access)

what about asking the question to the briefer on 1-800-WXBRIEF as
part of your weather briefing / flight plan filing?

ok, now we'll have to take care of those without telephone access :-)

--Sylvain

Bob Noel wrote:
> In article >,
> Stubby > wrote:
>
>
>>There is confusion in regard to which "twilight" times are used to
>>define night flying. What would be wrong with a change to the FARs that
>>say something like "Flight occuring an hour after GPS-indicated sunset
>>time and an hour before GPS-indicated sunrise is defined as night
>>flying"? (The standard exception for Alaska must be included...)
>
>
> 1) not everyone has GPS
There is no need for a pilot to actual own a GPS. He can look at a
friend's or one at the FBO, etc. But for the price of an hour of
instruction, anyone can purchase his very own GPS. Or, the FAA could
put up a web page with GPS sunrise and sunset times on it.
>
> 2) why not use the sunrise/sunset times provided by US Naval Observatory?
> (some means will need to be provided for those without internet access)
>

Doug wrote:
> How about "if it is dark out, it is night"? That is what most pilots
> use anyway. Or don't define it at all. Just call it night. People know
> what night is. The amount of darkness at night varies quite a bit, BTW.
> We all know that too. No moon, no snow, no city lights, yeah that's
> DARK. And a lit runway in such an environment can present problems you
> don't have in a city, with a moon and lots of nearby lighting.

I would like to use the casual definition, but it won't hold up in court
after an accident. Your own insurance company will want to split hairs.

Stubby wrote:
> Doug wrote:
>
>> How about "if it is dark out, it is night"? That is what most pilots
>> use anyway. Or don't define it at all. Just call it night. People know
>> what night is. The amount of darkness at night varies quite a bit, BTW.
>> We all know that too. No moon, no snow, no city lights, yeah that's
>> DARK. And a lit runway in such an environment can present problems you
>> don't have in a city, with a moon and lots of nearby lighting.
>
>
> I would like to use the casual definition, but it won't hold up in court
> after an accident. Your own insurance company will want to split hairs.
>

How would this come up in court? If I had an accident at night, with a
passenger, and my insurance company disputed my night currency, how
could they dispute my log entries which demonstrated my currency? I DO
maintain night currency, I log it, but I do not log the timestamp of
when the takeoffs/landings took place.

>>Or, the FAA could put up a web page with GPS sunrise and sunset times on
>>it.

You mean like this one?:

http://aa.usno.navy.mil/cgi-bin/aa_pap.pl


"Stubby" > wrote in message
...
> Bob Noel wrote:
>> In article >,
>> Stubby > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>There is confusion in regard to which "twilight" times are used to define
>>>night flying. What would be wrong with a change to the FARs that say
>>>something like "Flight occuring an hour after GPS-indicated sunset time
>>>and an hour before GPS-indicated sunrise is defined as night flying"?
>>>(The standard exception for Alaska must be included...)
>>
>>
>> 1) not everyone has GPS
> There is no need for a pilot to actual own a GPS. He can look at a
> friend's or one at the FBO, etc. But for the price of an hour of
> instruction, anyone can purchase his very own GPS. Or, the FAA could put
> up a web page with GPS sunrise and sunset times on it.
>>
>> 2) why not use the sunrise/sunset times provided by US Naval
>> Observatory?
>> (some means will need to be provided for those without internet access)
>>

On Tue, 8 Nov 2005 10:48:24 -0800, "Bob Gardner" >
wrote:

>Not so fast, Ron. Amazon is not the place to look....the Government Printing
>Office is.
>
>Air Almanac 2005
>Defense Dept., Navy, Naval Observatory, Nautical Almanac Office
>2004: 908 p.; ill.
>"Description: Provides astronomical data for air navigation. Contains
>ephemeral data for the year, together with auxiliary tables and graphs, and
>a brief explanation of the use of the volume. Presents data for the Sun,
>Moon, Aries, planets, and stars.
>NOTE: NB1301
>
>
>
> a.. S/N: 008-054-00201-3
> b.. Price: $61.00 In Stock - Warehouse and Retail (Priced) "
>Bob Gardner
>

Ah, Bob -- we are nit-picking here about 'legalities'.

I am well aware that the "Air Almanac" is the current USNO publication
containing astronomical data. However, the regulations under which we fly
call for referring to the **American** Air Almanac, which has not been
published for a number of years.

So the regulation needs to be changed to bring it into compliance with
current publication titles, and also, in my opinion, should be changed to
take into account local topography.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:13:07 GMT, Jose > wrote:

>> 2. If the purpose of night flying regulations is to require the currency
>> of special skills when it is "dark", then the times should be adjusted to
>> reflect local topography. For example, ridges and mountains may cause
>> darkness to be present earlier than the official sunset time.
>
>I think this is one of those places where judgement comes into play.
>We're not talking about much of a temporal difference.
>
>Jose

Well, there are legal, practical and safety issues also. On 29 March 2001
there was a fatal accident involving a Gulfstream at Aspen. They were
executing an approach that was not authorized "at night". "Official"
sunset occurred 33 minutes prior to the accident, so "official" night would
have occurred 3 minutes prior to the accident.

However, according to the NTSB calculations, the sun would have set below
the mountainous terrain about 25 minutes BEFORE official sunset time; and
the shadow for the ridge immediately to the west of the accident site would
have crossed the site 79 minutes earlier than official sunset.

Among the NTSB conclusions was "that the aeronautical definition of “night”
does not adequately describe the conditions under which darkness exists in
mountainous terrain and, therefore, use of this term may not adequately
restrict potentially hazardous flight operations".

The NTSB recommended revisions in this regulatory area, to adequately
address these issues.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

> They were
> executing an approach that was not authorized "at night". [...]
> Among the NTSB conclusions was "that the aeronautical definition of “night”
> does not adequately describe the conditions under which darkness exists in
> mountainous terrain and, therefore, use of this term may not adequately
> restrict potentially hazardous flight operations".

The procedure should then not be authorized "after 79 minutes before
sunsett" or somesuch, if this is a special case. If this is a common
problem however, then yes, a more general solution (which may involve
regulatory or training changes) is called for.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Bruce Riggs > writes:

>How would this come up in court? If I had an accident at night, with a
>passenger, and my insurance company disputed my night currency, how
>could they dispute my log entries which demonstrated my currency?

GPS logs (in my case, at least, and I suspect in others), rental records,
radio tapes, ...

But would they? I asked a long time ago about people logging night
take-offs and only got one person who claimed to do it and a bunch of
"well, it'll probably never be an issue" kind of responses.

--kyler

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:13:07 GMT, Jose > wrote:
>
>
>>>2. If the purpose of night flying regulations is to require the currency
>>>of special skills when it is "dark", then the times should be adjusted to
>>>reflect local topography. For example, ridges and mountains may cause
>>>darkness to be present earlier than the official sunset time.
>>
>>I think this is one of those places where judgement comes into play.
>>We're not talking about much of a temporal difference.
>>
>>Jose
>
>
> Well, there are legal, practical and safety issues also. On 29 March 2001
> there was a fatal accident involving a Gulfstream at Aspen. They were
> executing an approach that was not authorized "at night". "Official"
> sunset occurred 33 minutes prior to the accident, so "official" night would
> have occurred 3 minutes prior to the accident.
>
> However, according to the NTSB calculations, the sun would have set below
> the mountainous terrain about 25 minutes BEFORE official sunset time; and
> the shadow for the ridge immediately to the west of the accident site would
> have crossed the site 79 minutes earlier than official sunset.
>
> Among the NTSB conclusions was "that the aeronautical definition of “night”
> does not adequately describe the conditions under which darkness exists in
> mountainous terrain and, therefore, use of this term may not adequately
> restrict potentially hazardous flight operations".
>
> The NTSB recommended revisions in this regulatory area, to adequately
> address these issues.

The trouble is that you can NEVER write enough regulations to alleviate
poor judgement.


Matt

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 05:14:53 GMT, Jose > wrote:

>> They were
>> executing an approach that was not authorized "at night". [...]
>> Among the NTSB conclusions was "that the aeronautical definition of “night”
>> does not adequately describe the conditions under which darkness exists in
>> mountainous terrain and, therefore, use of this term may not adequately
>> restrict potentially hazardous flight operations".
>
>The procedure should then not be authorized "after 79 minutes before
>sunsett" or somesuch, if this is a special case. If this is a common
>problem however, then yes, a more general solution (which may involve
>regulatory or training changes) is called for.
>
>Jose

I think the combination of this sort of problem, along with the fact that
the wording in the regulations is outdated, speaks for a more general
solution.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

> I think the combination of this sort of problem, along with the fact that
> the wording in the regulations is outdated, speaks for a more general
> solution.

Outdated? In what way is it "outdated" (was good then but things have
changed"?)

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Stubby wrote:

> There is no need for a pilot to actual own a GPS. He can look at a
> friend's or one at the FBO, etc. But for the price of an hour of
> instruction, anyone can purchase his very own GPS. Or, the FAA could
> put up a web page with GPS sunrise and sunset times on it.

AFAIK there is no generally agreed upon "GPS sunrise". I'm guessing each GPS
manufacture has its own proprietary algorithm for determining sunrise/sunset.
That's fine for casual use, but I imagine regulation writers are looking for
something more standard.

Carl Orton wrote:
>
> You mean like this one?:
> http://aa.usno.navy.mil/cgi-bin/aa_pap.pl


You actually need to start here:
http://aa.usno.navy.mil/data/docs/RS_OneDay.html

--
John T
http://tknowlogy.com/TknoFlyer
http://www.pocketgear.com/products_search.asp?developerid=4415
Reduce spam. Use Sender Policy Framework: http://spf.pobox.com
____________________

Dave Butler > writes:
> Stubby wrote:
>
> > There is no need for a pilot to actual own a GPS. He can look at a
> > friend's or one at the FBO, etc. But for the price of an hour of
> > instruction, anyone can purchase his very own GPS. Or, the FAA could
> > put up a web page with GPS sunrise and sunset times on it.
>
> AFAIK there is no generally agreed upon "GPS sunrise". I'm guessing each GPS
> manufacture has its own proprietary algorithm for determining sunrise/sunset.
> That's fine for casual use, but I imagine regulation writers are looking for
> something more standard.

And does "rise" mean the first little bit's visible, the
full face is visible, or somewhere in between?

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 14:09:18 GMT, Jose > wrote:

>> I think the combination of this sort of problem, along with the fact that
>> the wording in the regulations is outdated, speaks for a more general
>> solution.
>
>Outdated? In what way is it "outdated" (was good then but things have
>changed"?)
>

The regulation requires reference to a publication which is out of print.


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:40:20 GMT, Matt Whiting > wrote:

>Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
>> On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:13:07 GMT, Jose > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>>2. If the purpose of night flying regulations is to require the currency
>>>>of special skills when it is "dark", then the times should be adjusted to
>>>>reflect local topography. For example, ridges and mountains may cause
>>>>darkness to be present earlier than the official sunset time.
>>>
>>>I think this is one of those places where judgement comes into play.
>>>We're not talking about much of a temporal difference.
>>>
>>>Jose
>>
>>
>> Well, there are legal, practical and safety issues also. On 29 March 2001
>> there was a fatal accident involving a Gulfstream at Aspen. They were
>> executing an approach that was not authorized "at night". "Official"
>> sunset occurred 33 minutes prior to the accident, so "official" night would
>> have occurred 3 minutes prior to the accident.
>>
>> However, according to the NTSB calculations, the sun would have set below
>> the mountainous terrain about 25 minutes BEFORE official sunset time; and
>> the shadow for the ridge immediately to the west of the accident site would
>> have crossed the site 79 minutes earlier than official sunset.
>>
>> Among the NTSB conclusions was "that the aeronautical definition of “night”
>> does not adequately describe the conditions under which darkness exists in
>> mountainous terrain and, therefore, use of this term may not adequately
>> restrict potentially hazardous flight operations".
>>
>> The NTSB recommended revisions in this regulatory area, to adequately
>> address these issues.
>
>The trouble is that you can NEVER write enough regulations to alleviate
>poor judgement.
>
>
>Matt

In view of the fact that it gets real dark at some airports well before
official "night", do you think that the regulations regarding night
currency are adequate?

Do you think that someone who is not night current should be allowed to
carry passengers VFR into ASE 45 minutes after "sunset" the way it is
currently defined in the regulations?




Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)

> In view of the fact that it gets real dark at some airports well before
> official "night", do you think that the regulations regarding night
> currency are adequate?
>
> Do you think that someone who is not night current should be allowed to
> carry passengers VFR into ASE 45 minutes after "sunset" the way it is
> currently defined in the regulations?

What is legal isn't always safe. Pilots are called upon all the time to
excercise judgement. I think the night currency regulations give
sufficient hints to pilots that this is an area where judgement might be
called for.

PILOTS are the ones that ensure safe flights, not rules.

Jose
--
He who laughs, lasts.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Nov 2005 11:40:20 GMT, Matt Whiting > wrote:
>
>
>>Ron Rosenfeld wrote:
>>
>>>On Tue, 08 Nov 2005 17:13:07 GMT, Jose > wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>>2. If the purpose of night flying regulations is to require the currency
>>>>>of special skills when it is "dark", then the times should be adjusted to
>>>>>reflect local topography. For example, ridges and mountains may cause
>>>>>darkness to be present earlier than the official sunset time.
>>>>
>>>>I think this is one of those places where judgement comes into play.
>>>>We're not talking about much of a temporal difference.
>>>>
>>>>Jose
>>>
>>>
>>>Well, there are legal, practical and safety issues also. On 29 March 2001
>>>there was a fatal accident involving a Gulfstream at Aspen. They were
>>>executing an approach that was not authorized "at night". "Official"
>>>sunset occurred 33 minutes prior to the accident, so "official" night would
>>>have occurred 3 minutes prior to the accident.
>>>
>>>However, according to the NTSB calculations, the sun would have set below
>>>the mountainous terrain about 25 minutes BEFORE official sunset time; and
>>>the shadow for the ridge immediately to the west of the accident site would
>>>have crossed the site 79 minutes earlier than official sunset.
>>>
>>>Among the NTSB conclusions was "that the aeronautical definition of “night”
>>>does not adequately describe the conditions under which darkness exists in
>>>mountainous terrain and, therefore, use of this term may not adequately
>>>restrict potentially hazardous flight operations".
>>>
>>>The NTSB recommended revisions in this regulatory area, to adequately
>>>address these issues.
>>
>>The trouble is that you can NEVER write enough regulations to alleviate
>>poor judgement.
>>
>>
>>Matt
>
>
> In view of the fact that it gets real dark at some airports well before
> official "night", do you think that the regulations regarding night
> currency are adequate?
>
> Do you think that someone who is not night current should be allowed to
> carry passengers VFR into ASE 45 minutes after "sunset" the way it is
> currently defined in the regulations?

I'm not familiar with ASE so I can't comment. However, that is my
point. There are a zillion variations and special cases and you simply
can't write enough regs to cover them all, and if you could, nobody
could ever learn them all!

Matt

Ron Rosenfeld > wrote:
>On 8 Nov 2005 05:50:19 -0800, "Andrew Sarangan" >
>wrote:
>
>>What's wrong with saying "as published in the American Air Almanac"?
>
>1. The American Air Almanac is out of print. It is not available on
>amazon.com although it may be available elsewhere. However, it has
>certainly not been updated in recent years.

Feh. I know it's hard to believe, but there are some things which
exist but you can't order from Amazon :-)

You can get current (2005 or 2006) editions of the Air Almanac
directly from the US GPO or UK Stationary Office, or from several
commercial suppliers, in print or on CD. See
http://aa.usno.navy.mil/publications/docs/ord_info.html for ordering
details.

If you're worried about the change in title from "American Air
Almanac" to "Air Almanac" (reflecting the fact that it is now
published jointly by the US Naval Observatory and the Her Majesty's
Nautical Almanac Office), you're obsessing over details even the FAA
would have trouble considering significant.

On Wed, 9 Nov 2005 22:40:53 +0000 (UTC), (Roy Smith) wrote:

> you're obsessing over details even the FAA
>would have trouble considering significant.

I'm in good company with the NTSB also writing that regulations and/or
guidance in this area is lacking.

However, obsessing over details is a well documented feature of this NG
:-))


Ron (EPM) (N5843Q, Mooney M20E) (CP, ASEL, ASES, IA)