External airplane lights
Dec 28, 2009 | 1:43 am
#1
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 13
External airplane lights
I've noticed that Alaska Airlines planes have lights that illuminate the logo on the tail when the landing/takeoff lights are on. I believe I have also seen such tail lights on American Eagle planes. What other airlines do you know of that have such lights? To me, it seems like few and fewer airlines have these lights. Is this true? If so, why?
Also, someone told me that on a recent UA flight, the pilot reported that there would be a 10 min delay while he filled out paper work that would make the plane legal to fly with a burned out light. What could this light have been? It doesn't seem to me that UA has any extra lights beyond the required.
Also, someone told me that on a recent UA flight, the pilot reported that there would be a 10 min delay while he filled out paper work that would make the plane legal to fly with a burned out light. What could this light have been? It doesn't seem to me that UA has any extra lights beyond the required.
Dec 28, 2009 | 3:11 pm
#2
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: +61
Programs: previous hero, now zero
Posts: 5,845
#1: marketing v. cost of the light
#2: It wouldn't have been beacon or strobes, or red/green/white tail/wing lights. Could have been something inside the cockpit, or perhaps some of the landing light (since they're redunant, I think). Was this a night-flight?
#2: It wouldn't have been beacon or strobes, or red/green/white tail/wing lights. Could have been something inside the cockpit, or perhaps some of the landing light (since they're redunant, I think). Was this a night-flight?
Dec 29, 2009 | 2:21 pm
#3
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 13
[QUOTE=YYCOllie;13069329
#2: It wouldn't have been beacon or strobes, or red/green/white tail/wing lights. Could have been something inside the cockpit, or perhaps some of the landing light (since they're redunant, I think). Was this a night-flight?[/QUOTE]
It was a day flight... I wonder, are there some lights that aren't mandatory for day flights?
#2: It wouldn't have been beacon or strobes, or red/green/white tail/wing lights. Could have been something inside the cockpit, or perhaps some of the landing light (since they're redunant, I think). Was this a night-flight?[/QUOTE]
It was a day flight... I wonder, are there some lights that aren't mandatory for day flights?
Dec 29, 2009 | 6:59 pm
#4
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Central Mass
Programs: Independent
Posts: 4,863
I believe all aircraft have tail lights. I notice that they rarely turn them on, however. But if you watch sometimes, they turn them on when crossing active runways and such, then turn them off again. Wish I knew the logic to this.
As for what light was out, who knows. The fact that it could be flown without it means it was nothing important, I would imagine it is probably something silly like an overhead lamp in the cockpit or something and the Pilot was being sarcastic. Otherwise I doubt he would actually announce over the intercom that they were going to fly without some kind of needed light.
To my knowledge, any of the exterior lights on an aircraft must be in working condition at all times.
As for what light was out, who knows. The fact that it could be flown without it means it was nothing important, I would imagine it is probably something silly like an overhead lamp in the cockpit or something and the Pilot was being sarcastic. Otherwise I doubt he would actually announce over the intercom that they were going to fly without some kind of needed light.
To my knowledge, any of the exterior lights on an aircraft must be in working condition at all times.
Dec 29, 2009 | 9:01 pm
#5
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: BNA
Programs: HH Silver. (Former UA PP, DL PM, PC Plat)
Posts: 9,540
Anti-collision lights (rotating becaon or strobes) must be working at all time. Navigation lights must be working from sunset to sunrise. At least one landing light, possibly more depending on the type aircraft, have to be operating from sunset to sunrise. Logo lights aren't required. They are optional and not all airlines order them.
Dec 30, 2009 | 7:34 am
#6
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: ARN/STO
Programs: SK EBS, BAEC blue, SPG
Posts: 586
From my understanding, the purpose of tail lights are mainly to enhance the aircraft's visibility when landing and taxiing on the ground, so they do have a security purpose as well.
It can also be useful to be able to visually identify aircraft on ground by for example flight controllers. But with today's ground radar systems and transponders, i suppose this is less important. If it had been a major safety concern, it would have been mandatory anyway.
As for navigational lights, most airlines keep them lit at daytime as well, but they are only required between dusk and dawn.
It can also be useful to be able to visually identify aircraft on ground by for example flight controllers. But with today's ground radar systems and transponders, i suppose this is less important. If it had been a major safety concern, it would have been mandatory anyway.
As for navigational lights, most airlines keep them lit at daytime as well, but they are only required between dusk and dawn.
Dec 30, 2009 | 4:33 pm
#7
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 13
Thanks everyone for all the info!
So it sounds like for the UA flight, the light bulb burned out must have been one of the ones that are not required in day time or some trivial light.
As far as my first question goes, basically even if a plane has tail logo lights, they may only be used during taxi? I can imagine that it may save the airlines some cash not ordering them, but if they are installed why don't they use them on approach? Are the light bulbs really that expensive (or not, I guess airlines like to save a penney anywhere they can)?
I, personally, get excited when I see a plane on approach at night and see the tail logo shining in full glory. Though, among US airlines, Alaska Airlines planes are among the only ones that I can think of that consistently have such logo lights. Can anyone think of any other airlines that use tail logo lights on approach?
So it sounds like for the UA flight, the light bulb burned out must have been one of the ones that are not required in day time or some trivial light.
As far as my first question goes, basically even if a plane has tail logo lights, they may only be used during taxi? I can imagine that it may save the airlines some cash not ordering them, but if they are installed why don't they use them on approach? Are the light bulbs really that expensive (or not, I guess airlines like to save a penney anywhere they can)?
I, personally, get excited when I see a plane on approach at night and see the tail logo shining in full glory. Though, among US airlines, Alaska Airlines planes are among the only ones that I can think of that consistently have such logo lights. Can anyone think of any other airlines that use tail logo lights on approach?
Dec 30, 2009 | 7:42 pm
#8
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: 64 miles North of SFO
Posts: 139
Thanks everyone for all the info!
The logo lights are discretionary they are not required for flight. However, it doesn't cost anything to have them on . I would think the airlines get their biggest bang for the buck when the A/C is at the gate with the tail illuminated.
They are also useful for ground operations as the cockpit crew and ground controllers can identify an aircraft easier if it has its tail lit up.
I don't know what it costs to install logo lights but its minor compared with the cost of the plane.
I do know that most of Hawaiian Airlines planes have logo lights.
BW
So it sounds like for the UA flight, the light bulb burned out must have been one of the ones that are not required in day time or some trivial light.
As far as my first question goes, basically even if a plane has tail logo lights, they may only be used during taxi? I can imagine that it may save the airlines some cash not ordering them, but if they are installed why don't they use them on approach? Are the light bulbs really that expensive (or not, I guess airlines like to save a penney anywhere they can)?
I, personally, get excited when I see a plane on approach at night and see the tail logo shining in full glory. Though, among US airlines, Alaska Airlines planes are among the only ones that I can think of that consistently have such logo lights. Can anyone think of any other airlines that use tail logo lights on approach?
The logo lights are discretionary they are not required for flight. However, it doesn't cost anything to have them on . I would think the airlines get their biggest bang for the buck when the A/C is at the gate with the tail illuminated.
They are also useful for ground operations as the cockpit crew and ground controllers can identify an aircraft easier if it has its tail lit up.
I don't know what it costs to install logo lights but its minor compared with the cost of the plane.
I do know that most of Hawaiian Airlines planes have logo lights.
BW
So it sounds like for the UA flight, the light bulb burned out must have been one of the ones that are not required in day time or some trivial light.
As far as my first question goes, basically even if a plane has tail logo lights, they may only be used during taxi? I can imagine that it may save the airlines some cash not ordering them, but if they are installed why don't they use them on approach? Are the light bulbs really that expensive (or not, I guess airlines like to save a penney anywhere they can)?
I, personally, get excited when I see a plane on approach at night and see the tail logo shining in full glory. Though, among US airlines, Alaska Airlines planes are among the only ones that I can think of that consistently have such logo lights. Can anyone think of any other airlines that use tail logo lights on approach?
Dec 30, 2009 | 9:54 pm
#9
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Halifax, Nova Scotia
Programs: FOTSG
Posts: 413
Having as many lights on as possible makes it easier to spot the aircraft as it crosses the runway, so that any plane landing can see and avoid (if required).
Dec 31, 2009 | 2:30 am
#10
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Exile
Posts: 16,064
I've seen one airline have to ground a 757 because their MEL specified a 90 day deferral on logo lights and with that long lead time their maintrol simply forgot to order a replacement. Very expensive lightbulb that turned out to be.
Dec 31, 2009 | 3:35 pm
#12
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: DTW
Programs: Dirt Status w/ All
Posts: 5,049
They are most likely coming on with the landing lights which they turn on to cross active runways. Better visibility to approaching aircraft or someone already on the runway. They turn them off once clear since it would be like a car with its brights on and blinding to pilots of other planes on the ground.
Dec 31, 2009 | 9:33 pm
#13
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 60
The logo lights are optional. The crew can use them for visibility to other aircraft at night. The logo lights are never required. (MEL category D /120 days deferral) Many crews don't operate them these days as a protest against dealings with management. American Eagle specifically prohibits their crews from ever operating them. They are not connected to the landing light system. Any other questions?
Jan 4, 2010 | 12:44 am
#14
Original Poster
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 13
The logo lights are optional. The crew can use them for visibility to other aircraft at night. The logo lights are never required. (MEL category D /120 days deferral) Many crews don't operate them these days as a protest against dealings with management. American Eagle specifically prohibits their crews from ever operating them. They are not connected to the landing light system. Any other questions?
Too bad to see the demise of the logo lights. When's the last time anyone has seen any of the legacy airlines use logo lights?