3 ms·

I give up--why shouldn't airplane strobes be on while they're on the ground?

sokoloff 8y ago
Harms night vision adaptation of other pilots. My SOP is beacon (red, top and bottom) on with aircraft battery bus on, strobes on only when on an open runway, landing lights on when cleared for takeoff (or lined-up and waiting in position for takeoff). That seems to be a fairly common SOP for aircraft with separate control of beacon vs strobe. It communicates a small amount of additional information, but more relevantly, it doesn't leave you sitting next to another airplane with blinding strobes on, killing your night vision adaptation. (Cirrus drives me crazy with their single switch anti-collision lights which light the strobes and beacon together.) Here's the FAA (recommended, but not regulatory) guidance on the topic: (See "Use of Aircraft Lights") http://www.faraim.org/aim/aim-4-03-14-209.html http://www.faraim.org/aim/aim-4-03-14-209.html
- throwaway5250 8y ago
  I guess that sounds good, though it might sound less good after a mass casualty collision. Wonder if we couldn't have "ground strobes" visible only to viewers looking downward at a significant angle.
  - captain_perl 8y ago
    No, because when there's fog, the strobe gets reflected within the cloud everywhere. This is SFO after all.
    - sokoloff 8y ago
      In the case of fog or other low clouds though, airplanes are overwhelmingly likely to be following a localizer or GPS/RNAV approach, making this type of incident much less likely.
      - throwaway5250 8y ago
        Hmm. So why not use that technique _all_ of the time?
        sokoloff 8y ago
        Well, AC759 should have been doing so, even on the visual approach to 28R. On this particular approach (in contrast to literally every other approach in the FMS's database), a manual tuning step was required and skipped.-[0] If there were another approach that required manual tuning and it was not a visual approach, the crew would detect they didn't have a localizer/equivalent to follow and would identify the missed step, because that's the only way they could navigate to the airport/runway. It's a specific combination of visual approach and the only approach that required manual tuning (and not having another aircraft to follow visually) that setup this possible outcome. Then, the crew visually acquires the wrong bit of pavement and there's no safety mechanism inside the airplane remaining unless/until the pilots see that they're lined up wrong or get a go-around call from ATC/another aircrew. [0] - Quote from the NTSB report: The FMS Bridge visual approach to runway 28R was the only approach in Air Canada’s Airbus A320 database that required manual tuning for a navigational aid, so the manual tuning of the ILS frequency was not a usual procedure for the flight crew.
drcoopster 8y ago
They ruin other pilots' and crewmembers night vision. Sokoloff's post just before mine is more articulate on this. I learned the same: strobes on when cleared for takeoff.

Harms night vision adaptation of other pilots. My SOP is beacon (red, top and bottom) on with aircraft battery bus on, strobes on only when on an open runway, landing lights on when cleared for takeoff (or lined-up and waiting in position for takeoff). That seems to be a fairly common SOP for aircraft with separate control of beacon vs strobe. It communicates a small amount of additional information, but more relevantly, it doesn't leave you sitting next to another airplane with blinding strobes on, killing your night vision adaptation. (Cirrus drives me crazy with their single switch anti-collision lights which light the strobes and beacon together.) Here's the FAA (recommended, but not regulatory) guidance on the topic: (See "Use of Aircraft Lights") http://www.faraim.org/aim/aim-4-03-14-209.html http://www.faraim.org/aim/aim-4-03-14-209.html

throwaway5250 8y ago
I guess that sounds good, though it might sound less good after a mass casualty collision. Wonder if we couldn't have "ground strobes" visible only to viewers looking downward at a significant angle.
- captain_perl 8y ago
  No, because when there's fog, the strobe gets reflected within the cloud everywhere. This is SFO after all.
  - sokoloff 8y ago
    In the case of fog or other low clouds though, airplanes are overwhelmingly likely to be following a localizer or GPS/RNAV approach, making this type of incident much less likely.
    - throwaway5250 8y ago
      Hmm. So why not use that technique _all_ of the time?
      - sokoloff 8y ago
        Well, AC759 should have been doing so, even on the visual approach to 28R. On this particular approach (in contrast to literally every other approach in the FMS's database), a manual tuning step was required and skipped.-[0] If there were another approach that required manual tuning and it was not a visual approach, the crew would detect they didn't have a localizer/equivalent to follow and would identify the missed step, because that's the only way they could navigate to the airport/runway. It's a specific combination of visual approach and the only approach that required manual tuning (and not having another aircraft to follow visually) that setup this possible outcome. Then, the crew visually acquires the wrong bit of pavement and there's no safety mechanism inside the airplane remaining unless/until the pilots see that they're lined up wrong or get a go-around call from ATC/another aircrew. [0] - Quote from the NTSB report: The FMS Bridge visual approach to runway 28R was the only approach in Air Canada’s Airbus A320 database that required manual tuning for a navigational aid, so the manual tuning of the ILS frequency was not a usual procedure for the flight crew.

drcoopster 8y ago

They ruin other pilots' and crewmembers night vision. Sokoloff's post just before mine is more articulate on this. I learned the same: strobes on when cleared for takeoff.