Runway approach lighting

[Hardy Heinlin]

Hi all,

does anybody have a tip on ICAO/FAA rules on this subject?

My question is: When Rwy 36 is active, should ATC switch off the approach lighting to Rwy 18? Or may this 18 approach lighting be used as a visual guidance when departing from Rwy 36? (Not really helpful, I guess.)


Thanks, cheers,

|-|ardy

[Holger Wende]

Hi Hardy,

I have no clue whether such a regulation exists.
But I searched the Internet a bit for photos/videos of departing aircraft where the "opposite" approach lighting is visible. And I found a few where the opposite approach lights were off.

Well, this is of course not a proof for unavailability of such a rule.
But while scanning through the photos I got the impression that the opposite approach lights are not well visible anyway.
Active opposite approach lighting might be interesting e.g. in cases where an aircraft might need to return quckliy as discussed the "Sully could have made it..." thread.

Furthermore I could imaging, that approach lights on all inactive runways should be off to avoid confusion of approaching traffic.

Just "unprofessional" thoughts...
Regards, Holger

[martin]

Moi,

are these lights bi- (or multi-)directional at all, so that they could be seen "from the backside"?

Cheers,
 

Martin______nitraM

[Jeroen Hoppenbrouwers]

I regularly pass the approach lighting array of EHGR 28 and the angle of this array to the road gives me a mostly front view when driving South-West, and mostly rear view when driving North-East. When going South-West I can spot the bright lights and the strobe (rabbit) very clearly, even when heading straight into the sun. The opposite direction does not really tell me a lot, the strobe is visible, but the lights almost not.

So I guess the lights are aimed/focused quite a lot in the approach direction.

[Holger Wende]

Hi Hardy,

your absolutely impressive Alpha 36 screenshots again inspired me to scan though the photos I found while Google-ing for more "approach lighting" pictures.

One reason was, because I had the impression the red-white contrast of the VASI/PAPI could/should be higher. But at least from the internet photos I found it seems that the contrast is not as high as I had expected initially.

Annother reason was to look for reverse approach lights at the end of the runway again. And I found (untill now) no single photo where the reverse approach lighting was visible. I will go through into my aviation DVDs next...

Regards, Holger

[Hardy Heinlin]

Hi Holger,

the lights in PSX gradually fade out with increasing distance and eventually disappear in the haze without much contrast. Also, the red light must never be darker than or equally dark as the background otherwise it doesn't look like a lamp, so it may need to get bright red (rosé) depending on daylight, thus may get less contrast by day.


Cheers,

|-|ardy

[Hardy Heinlin]

The VASI in the EHAM screenshot is red-red.

...

By the way, Holger, I think you can't evaluate the contrast of real-world lights by photographs: these photos usually have an exposure optimal for the landscape, and since the landscape is usually darker than any active lights (VASI, sun whatever), these active lights tend to plain white due to over-exposure.


|-|

[Hardy Heinlin]

Here's one with PAPI in red-white:





Cheers,

|-|ardy

[James Lacey]

Lovin' that ND!  

[Peter Lang]

just enjoying the outside view into the sunset.

Hardy, did you simulate volcanic ash clouds over India?  

Peter

[Hardy Heinlin]

Volcanoes not switched on yet!


|-|

[Lasse]

Hi

Well the lights are in most countries kept on, but dimmed... However they are unidirectional so you cannot see them from opposite direction like we can on the else nice screen shot...
EU-OPS requires the lights to be on only on active rwy, and ICAO Annex 2 i think it is. ATC is only allowed to switch off lights if they can be lid again 1 hour before ETA...

Would it be possible however to get 4 lights for a PAPI, not only 2?

Best regards
Lasse

[Hardy Heinlin]

Hi,

I can make them unidirectional if you want. Do you want me to do this? The code for this is already implemented and used for some other light objects.

However, I don't want to increase the amount of lights in general. The simplified scenery style should remain constant and balanced in relation among all objects. Actually, I consider the objects "symbols", i.e. the ALS, PAPI etc. are not supposed to be 1:1 copies of real-world objects, but just symbolic references.

All power to the aircraft simulation.


Cheers,

|-|ardy

[Will]

What is the red "211" on the left side of the ND?

[Will]

I guess the majority view is that the lights always stay on, but are uni-directional. That isn't my recollection, at least not at big airports. The smaller airports would raise and lower all of the lights at once, and the ALS was indeed unidirectional. But large airports... I recall thy they would turn off the bright lights fr runways that weren't active. The theory seems rock solid: don't provide approach cues that would be dangerous to follow. I think someone should run this question by a "local" controller to get an authoritative answer.

[Lasse]

Hi

Well to make it more realistic without compromising your philosophy of keeping the outside simple then I think the approach lights should be unidirectional.
I had a feeling that you had choosen to keep also the PAPI simple, and most of you are gonna run some other program for the visional presentation anyway.
My only thinking is that the PAPI is used for the very last part of the landing for all the approaches except ILS CAT IIIx. So just to be able to precisely fly the G/S from minima, but I understand your philosophy.

Best regards
Lasse

[Lasse]

Hi Will

I forgot your question: The 211 presented in red on the ND under TERR is part of the EGPWS.
So the terrain to the left hand side is 2110 feet and above A/C therefore displayed in red and the lowest on the display is 400 presented in green, - and more than 500 feet below A/C as I recall it...(Don't hang me up on the 500', I can look it up for you if you really wanna know)
The colors of the numbers will correspond to the presented terrain.

Hope that gave some explanation...

Best regards
Lasse

[Zinger]

A little late, but:
http://www.faa.gov/air_traffic/publications/atpubs/FSS/fss1101.htm#Chapter 11. Airport Lighting and Visibility Aids

I believe it suggests that approach lights should be operated for the landing runway/s and also for runway used for approach when landing is planned for another runway (such as circle to land approach).

Hi all,

does anybody have a tip on ICAO/FAA rules on this subject?

My question is: When Rwy 36 is active, should ATC switch off the approach lighting to Rwy 18? Or may this 18 approach lighting be used as a visual guidance when departing from Rwy 36? (Not really helpful, I guess.)


Thanks, cheers,

|-|ardy

[cavaricooper]

Hardy-

As more airlines and aviation educators adopt PSX I wonder if now is the time to ask for consideration re. a slightly more robust approach lighting package?

I find myself flying PSX stand-alone more and more, even on my networked multi-PC setup, and this is one area where I find myself often wishing PSX had a more detailed instrument to visual transition. I would ask you to please consider if there may be immediate and tangible training benefit with a more detailed and varied Hi/ALS package, especially in CAT II and CAT III SITUs?

Fingers x'ed!

Ta- C

PS- sorry about the necropost, but I did use Search

[Hardy Heinlin]

You informed several times in the past years about your wish (nearly the same text, also by email) and my answer is still the same: My todo list is very long and your wish is not trivial.

Very, very long :-)

|-|ardy