E190 poor design

[Autothrust Blue]

It's actually pretty clear cut for us. White anti-collision lights on when entering the departure runway. Does not say "...unless it annoys ATN pilots behind you."

Rules is rules; unless there's a good reason to turn them off beyond "you're annoying". Just don't look at us, put your head under the glare shield.

Plus, if someone hits me, it won't be because my lights aren't on.

 

[RightSeatGirl]

Rules is rules; unless there's a good reason to turn them off beyond "you're annoying". Just don't look at us, put your head under the glare shield.

Plus, if someone hits me, it won't be because my lights aren't on.

I want to make it clear I mean no disrespect toward you personally with this comment and I do understand your position. But I find this mentality to be of the "would you fly your plane into a mountain because you're POH says so?" variety. Can you cite one single solitary example of any crew or pilot ever being violated because their white strobes didn't go on the moment you took the runway? Airlines, nor the FAA want drones in cockpits. They want thinking pilots. Those blazing white strobes compromise night vision. They effect depth perception and that does create a safety issue. I think the root of this issue is that their should probably be an update on this rule issued as when it was written I don't think "20,000" lumen strobes existed yet. Put on your thinking cap here and don't just do without considering the bigger picture. This rule is flawed and it makes no sense. There is simply no logical (not arguing the existing regulatory aspect) justification to run white strobes until you are cleared for t/o. You are not going to get violated by being courteous to the crew behind you in the t/o line.

 

[Bumblebee]

I turn them on so that approaching traffic can see me, if there is an issue with those on the ground they should look away.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USAir_Flight_1493

 

[dasleben]

I want to make it clear I mean no disrespect toward you personally with this comment and I do understand your position. But I find this mentality to be of the "would you fly your plane into a mountain because you're POH says so?" variety. Can you cite one single solitary example of any crew or pilot ever being violated because their white strobes didn't go on the moment you took the runway? Airlines, nor the FAA want drones in cockpits. They want thinking pilots. Those blazing white strobes compromise night vision. They effect depth perception and that does create a safety issue. I think the root of this issue is that their should probably be an update on this rule issued as when it was written I don't think "20,000" lumen strobes existed yet. Put on your thinking cap here and don't just do without considering the bigger picture. This rule is flawed and it makes no sense. There is simply no logical (not arguing the existing regulatory aspect) justification to run white strobes until you are cleared for t/o. You are not going to get violated by being courteous to the crew behind you in the t/o line.

Like I said, there are safety reasons for having your lights on while on an active runway (the USAir 737 landing on top of a SKW Metro some years back is one such example). I am aware that certain manufacturers have strobes attached to a weight-on-wheels switch (and that's fine), but that's not the norm. "Don't be a drone" doesn't mean that any and all rules are subject to be waived by the flight crew (and yes, crews can be disciplined by both the FAA and company for not following these established procedures without real rationale).

And really, there are so many bright lights at night at any major airport, you'd be hard pressed to single out strobes as a detriment to safety.

 

[RightSeatGirl]

Like I said, there are safety reasons for having your lights on while on an active runway (the USAir 737 landing on top of a SKW Metro some years back is one such example). I am aware that certain manufacturers have strobes attached to a weight-on-wheels switch (and that's fine), but that's not the norm. "Don't be a drone" doesn't mean that any and all rules are subject to be waived by the flight crew (and yes, crews can be disciplined by both the FAA and company for not following these established procedures without real rationale).

And really, there are so many bright lights at night at any major airport, you'd be hard pressed to single out strobes as a detriment to safety.

But at the same time think about what you see on approach to a runway at night. Flashing white lights are associated with REILs and approach light systems. And an aircraft's strobes flashing as it sits on the end of a runway can easily be mistaken for REIL's. If you've got a flashing or rotating red beacon that should be used in lieu of white strobes as something flashing red means BAD - Don't land...Flashing white lights on the other hand don't instantaneously jump out as such..You really have to concentrate when at a fair distance say over a 5 mile final to discern what you are looking at. So at the same time you'd be hard pressed to say that white strobes on a runway enhances safety!

My point is that there is a good rationale to ignore this rule. People with poor night vision even more so. It's a stupid rule period. And if a crew fails to have the moxy to think outside the box and make an operational decision to override something that makes no sense then that's not a crew I'd want to fly with. I want to be in a cockpit with a pilot that thinks for themselves always considering the regulatory aspect but not being so glued to it they kill the night vision of the 10 plus crews in the t/o line behind them.Those seem to be the crews that in an abstract way literally fly the POH right into a mountain.

I agree with not just arbitrarily ignoring any rule you want and I never suggested otherwise. You imply to much in that comment. But doing something pointless and discourteous because you fear discipline that is simply never gonna happen over something like this is a bit over the top. Again, cite one single example of a crew being violated or disciplined over this issue? You are absolutely correct in your observation of the regulatory side of this, but you have to admit that aviation, especially 121 aviation is so grossly over-regulated that it's become simply impossible for anyone to stay 100% compliant 100% of the time and still be safe. There is too much red-tape and that red tape seems to clog up the thinking minds of flight crews too often.

 

[BobDDuck]

I was taught it as "threat and error management", but it's probably the same thing. As I understood it, it's sort of a framework for identifying connections between human performance and operational safety in aviation. It consists of threats, errors (things that are assumed to be present on every flight) and the progress from those to "undesired aircraft states". The idea is basically that threats can come from a number of places (environmental, organizational, etc); errors can be a number of human-related mistakes (procedural, communications, actual flying); and failure to identify and address them at some level can lead to an undesirable aircraft state (navigation errors, mechanical issues, weather situations, etc).

The company I worked for started teaching this in recurrent, but it can be applied systemwide as well as on a flight-by-flight basis. Our training department started really looking at our procedures and determining where the sequence we did things posed threats, and would change the FOM accordingly. I thought they did a pretty good job of it, honestly.

Actually, I think Derg was talking about something different. For a period of time (and possible still today) the lovely, benevolent FAA had a system in place where they would use a matrix to punish you for a deviation. Mitigating circumstances and operational realities didn't matter. If you did the crime you did the time. It was pretty stupid and inflexible and I think they've stopped using it as a result.

 

[zmiller4]

Actually, I think Derg was talking about something different. For a period of time (and possible still today) the lovely, benevolent FAA had a system in place where they would use a matrix to punish you for a deviation. Mitigating circumstances and operational realities didn't matter. If you did the crime you did the time. It was pretty stupid and inflexible and I think they've stopped using it as a result.

That makes sense. I had never heard of that. It sounds like it might be referring to the "Enforcement Decision Tool/Process" of Order 2150.3...or maybe that's what replaced the "matrix", because even the earliest versions allow for "informal" action in the case of low-risk, "careless" (as opposed to "reckless" or "intentional" violations).

 

[Firebird2XC]

But at the same time think about what you see on approach to a runway at night. Flashing white lights are associated with REILs and approach light systems. And an aircraft's strobes flashing as it sits on the end of a runway can easily be mistaken for REIL's. If you've got a flashing or rotating red beacon that should be used in lieu of white strobes as something flashing red means BAD - Don't land...Flashing white lights on the other hand don't instantaneously jump out as such..You really have to concentrate when at a fair distance say over a 5 mile final to discern what you are looking at. So at the same time you'd be hard pressed to say that white strobes on a runway enhances safety!

My point is that there is a good rationale to ignore this rule. People with poor night vision even more so. It's a stupid rule period. And if a crew fails to have the moxy to think outside the box and make an operational decision to override something that makes no sense then that's not a crew I'd want to fly with. I want to be in a cockpit with a pilot that thinks for themselves always considering the regulatory aspect but not being so glued to it they kill the night vision of the 10 plus crews in the t/o line behind them.Those seem to be the crews that in an abstract way literally fly the POH right into a mountain.

I agree with not just arbitrarily ignoring any rule you want and I never suggested otherwise. You imply to much in that comment. But doing something pointless and discourteous because you fear discipline that is simply never gonna happen over something like this is a bit over the top. Again, cite one single example of a crew being violated or disciplined over this issue? You are absolutely correct in your observation of the regulatory side of this, but you have to admit that aviation, especially 121 aviation is so grossly over-regulated that it's become simply impossible for anyone to stay 100% compliant 100% of the time and still be safe. There is too much red-tape and that red tape seems to clog up the thinking minds of flight crews too often.

Your tag line is pretty bright. Is that affecting my night vision?

Simple ettiquette here. Try not to blind the people around you with your strobes.

During takeoff and landing, use 'em of you want. But with all the approach lights/landing lights/taxi lights, etc, do ya need them?

Company policy or PIC discretion.

 

[MikeD]

But at the same time think about what you see on approach to a runway at night. Flashing white lights are associated with REILs and approach light systems. And an aircraft's strobes flashing as it sits on the end of a runway can easily be mistaken for REIL's. If you've got a flashing or rotating red beacon that should be used in lieu of white strobes as something flashing red means BAD - Don't land...Flashing white lights on the other hand don't instantaneously jump out as such..You really have to concentrate when at a fair distance say over a 5 mile final to discern what you are looking at. So at the same time you'd be hard pressed to say that white strobes on a runway enhances safety!
.

The idea behind the rule was to have yourself be seen. Strobes on an aircraft will be in a different position than REILs, normally further down the runway in the position and hold area, with landing/taxi lights illuminating around and ahead of it. Now, whether or not that will be noticed or not will depend on the particular runway you're talking about. A runway at KPHX? Likely will be good, as apart from HIRLs and REILs, the runway itself is fairly dark. At another airport with CLs and TDZLs? Maybe or maybe not. Surrounding cultural lighting will also play a part.

Keeping in mind that no safety measure is perfect, and no safety measure will cover 100% of situations; I think this one is better than nothing, in my professional opinion.

 

[Nick]

Actually, I think Derg was talking about something different. For a period of time (and possible still today) the lovely, benevolent FAA had a system in place where they would use a matrix to punish you for a deviation. Mitigating circumstances and operational realities didn't matter. If you did the crime you did the time. It was pretty stupid and inflexible and I think they've stopped using it as a result.

Oh that's absolutely still in use, I pull it out during ERC meetings too often.

It's very subjective though, and a reasonable FAA inspector has a bit of leeway when using the EDP matrix.

http://fsims.faa.gov/WDocs/8900.1/V14 Compliance & Enforcement/Chapter 01/14_001_008.htm

At least it's in writing and a system is in place though, as opposed to an inspector having a blank check to revoke a pilot's certificates for almost anything.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

But at the same time think about what you see on approach to a runway at night. Flashing white lights are associated with REILs and approach light systems. And an aircraft's strobes flashing as it sits on the end of a runway can easily be mistaken for REIL's. If you've got a flashing or rotating red beacon that should be used in lieu of white strobes as something flashing red means BAD - Don't land...Flashing white lights on the other hand don't instantaneously jump out as such..You really have to concentrate when at a fair distance say over a 5 mile final to discern what you are looking at. So at the same time you'd be hard pressed to say that white strobes on a runway enhances safety!

My point is that there is a good rationale to ignore this rule. People with poor night vision even more so. It's a stupid rule period. And if a crew fails to have the moxy to think outside the box and make an operational decision to override something that makes no sense then that's not a crew I'd want to fly with. I want to be in a cockpit with a pilot that thinks for themselves always considering the regulatory aspect but not being so glued to it they kill the night vision of the 10 plus crews in the t/o line behind them.Those seem to be the crews that in an abstract way literally fly the POH right into a mountain.

I agree with not just arbitrarily ignoring any rule you want and I never suggested otherwise. You imply to much in that comment. But doing something pointless and discourteous because you fear discipline that is simply never gonna happen over something like this is a bit over the top. Again, cite one single example of a crew being violated or disciplined over this issue? You are absolutely correct in your observation of the regulatory side of this, but you have to admit that aviation, especially 121 aviation is so grossly over-regulated that it's become simply impossible for anyone to stay 100% compliant 100% of the time and still be safe. There is too much red-tape and that red tape seems to clog up the thinking minds of flight crews too often.

Exactly!

I wonder how many of the people who are harping on FOM requirements to turn on the strobes on the runway also read non-company materials in the cockpit or violate the sterile cockpit rule?

Blinding people with your strobes and ruining their night vision is dangerous. The best way to be seen on the runway is to have your landing lights on. Those are far more easily seen by someone on final than a couple of tiny pulsing lights that blend in with everything else, and no one sitting next to the runway about to takeoff is going to be blinded by them. The landing lights light up the runway in front of the plane, making things look "off" to someone on final. Strobes are unlikely to be noticed by an aircraft on final. It's just a silly justification for something that need not be done.

 

[MikeD]

Exactly!

I wonder how many of the people who are harping on FOM requirements to turn on the strobes on the runway also read non-company materials in the cockpit or violate the sterile cockpit rule?

Blinding people with your strobes and ruining their night vision is dangerous. The best way to be seen on the runway is to have your landing lights on. Those are far more easily seen by someone on final than a couple of tiny pulsing lights that blend in with everything else, and no one sitting next to the runway about to takeoff is going to be blinded by them. The landing lights light up the runway in front of the plane, making things look "off" to someone on final. Strobes are unlikely to be noticed by an aircraft on final. It's just a silly justification for something that need not be done.

It depends. Like I said, it depends on the airport. With ramp lighting and CLs and TDZLs, landing lights blend in to that. Strobes at least provide something that contrasts. On the other hand, on a dark runway that only has HIRLs, the landing lights will be seen as well as the strobes. With REILs, there can be additional challenges to using strobes, as RSL and you pointed out. My point is, there's no perfect solution. There never will be. Strobes while taxiing? Completely unneeded. Strobes while beginning the takeoff roll? Shouldn't be any problem for other aircraft. Even if you're number 6 for takeoff....waiting on the parallel while crawling to the runway entrance, the plane in position with it's landing lights on, will probably blind you more than his strobes will.

What works at one airport, may or may not work at another. Plus, with differing and varying lighting styles on aircraft, one method of doing business won't work either.

 

[Ian_J]

Why do airline pilots care about their night vision?

 

[dasleben]

I just honestly have never felt strobes on departing aircraft have been a hazard to my night vision. Between bright taxiway lights, runway lights, lights from other aircraft on approach, etc., there are simply so many bright light sources that strobes don't cause a sudden increase in risk. Treat strobes like any other light source; don't stare at them, and you'll be fine.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Mike, I look at it this way:

The chance that I'm going to be landed on while sitting on the runway after I've been listening to tower frequency for situational awareness of the location of traffic, and checking final when going into position? Virtually non-existent.

The chance that I'm going to blind someone sitting next to the runway right before they're in a critical phase of flight by turning on my strobes while sitting on the runway? Virtually certain.

Easy choice.

Multiple recent accidents and incidents have involved contributing factors of pilots not adhering to sterile cockpit. Yet I can't remember a single pilot I've flown with in 10+ years of airline flying who actually strictly adhered to the sterile cockpit rule. But many of those same pilots will claim that turning on the strobes is a vital safety item, even though there isn't a single accident that I'm aware of in which the NTSB ruled that the probable cause or a contributing factor was the lack of strobes (or any other aircraft lights) being on. Let's get real here.

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Why do airline pilots care about their night vision?

A common takeoff clearance in Atlanta: "Citrus 1246, maintain visual separation with the departing Mad Dog, RNAV to FUTBL, cleared for takeoff 27R."

I'd really like to be able to see that departing Mad Dog that I'm supposed to be staying away from.

 

[MikeD]

Mike, I look at it this way:

The chance that I'm going to be landed on while sitting on the runway after I've been listening to tower frequency for situational awareness of the location of traffic, and checking final when going into position? Virtually non-existent.

The chance that I'm going to blind someone sitting next to the runway right before they're in a critical phase of flight by turning on my strobes while sitting on the runway? Virtually certain.

Easy choice.

Multiple recent accidents and incidents have involved contributing factors of pilots not adhering to sterile cockpit. Yet I can't remember a single pilot I've flown with in 10+ years of airline flying who actually strictly adhered to the sterile cockpit rule. But many of those same pilots will claim that turning on the strobes is a vital safety item, even though there isn't a single accident that I'm aware of in which the NTSB ruled that the probable cause or a contributing factor was the lack of strobes (or any other aircraft lights) being on. Let's get real here.

Thats the thing though, some aircraft have lighting combinations where the strobe light is the same as their beacon light. Some have top strobes, bottom strobes, wing strobes; and these can be day strobes or night strobes (ie- white/day, red/night). Since the night strobes are obvious with regards to having them on, we'll talk day strobes. Which I agree with you that on taxi, in the parking area, etc, are not needed. Or even holding short....not needed. Apart from USAir 1493 and Eastern 111, there hasn't been a rash of accidents attributable to not being seen at night on the runway, but no one wants to be the next one. Thats why I think switching them on when cleared for takeoff and rolling isn't a bad idea and is a compromise between being seen on a runway (even by ATC who may have forgotten you are sitting there if you're in position and hold, which is not done often), and disturbing the night vision of another pilot who has the ability to not look directly at you.

On the sterile cockpit discipline vs what we're discussing here; thats a good question.

 

[Ian_J]

A common takeoff clearance in Atlanta: "Citrus 1246, maintain visual separation with the departing Mad Dog, RNAV to FUTBL, cleared for takeoff 27R."

I'd really like to be able to see that departing Mad Dog that I'm supposed to be staying away from.

Don't all their flashing strobes make them easy to see?

 

[SlumTodd_Millionaire]

Don't all their flashing strobes make them easy to see?

Easy to see when they're flashing 100 feet away from you while sitting on the runway, not so easy to see when they're flashing a mile ahead and you've already been blinded while holding short of the runway.

 

[PositionAndHold]

Exactly!

I wonder how many of the people who are harping on FOM requirements to turn on the strobes on the runway also read non-company materials in the cockpit or violate the sterile cockpit rule?

Blinding people with your strobes and ruining their night vision is dangerous. The best way to be seen on the runway is to have your landing lights on. Those are far more easily seen by someone on final than a couple of tiny pulsing lights that blend in with everything else, and no one sitting next to the runway about to takeoff is going to be blinded by them. The landing lights light up the runway in front of the plane, making things look "off" to someone on final. Strobes are unlikely to be noticed by an aircraft on final. It's just a silly justification for something that need not be done.

From 4-3-23 of the AIM
"g. When entering the departure runway for takeoff or to “line up and wait,” all lights, except for landing lights, should be illuminated to make the aircraft conspicuous to ATC and other aircraft on approach. Landing lights should be turned on when takeoff clearance is received or when commencing takeoff roll at an airport without an operating control tower."

I used this guidance at XJT, and currently flying pt. 91. As long as your not taxiing around with your strobes on, I think most people are happy. I haven't really had an issue being number one while some one had their strobes on holding in position.

The thing that really gets blinding is when two A/C are holding short across the runway from each other. As soon as one guy gets take off cllearance, with out fail, BAM! Landing lights to face! For the love of good wait till you've turned the corner before frying some ones corneas!