Sponsor Message:
Aviation Technical / Operations Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
UPS 757 Landing At Night W/o Lights?  
User currently offlineMotopolitico From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 212 posts, RR: 0
Posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6501 times:

I was spotting tonight at SDF, and I saw a 757 come in on nothing but strobes until after the aircraft had crossed the threshhold, then the plane lit up like a christmas tree. Saw 741, DC-8-70s, A306s, and 767s, and all of them had their landing lights on through the whole final approach. What operating reason would the lone 757 have had to not have its lights on?


Garbage stinks; trash don't!
54 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineFr8Mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5470 posts, RR: 14
Reply 1, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6515 times:

The crew probably forgot to turn them on. Of course, since the landing lights are on the 18000' checklist, it brings up other questions.


When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineLowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 2, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 22 hours ago) and read 6520 times:

"Hey George"

"Yeah Joe?"

"Did they paint the runways black while we were gone?"

"Oh #$@%"

(landing lights come on)


EDIT: A while back, there was a thread on another board titled "I have never..." There is probably a story here for that thread. I know I have never gotten distracted and forgotten to turn on the landing lights.  liar 

[Edited 2006-11-16 08:21:28]


Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlineCancidas From Poland, joined Jul 2003, 4112 posts, RR: 11
Reply 3, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 13 hours ago) and read 6516 times:

gotta love situations like that... just a reminder we're all human. oh yea, they're funny as hell too!


"...cannot the kingdom of salvation take me home."
User currently offlineBingo From United States of America, joined Nov 2006, 359 posts, RR: 0
Reply 4, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6508 times:

Quote:
What operating reason would the lone 757 have had to not have its lights on?



Probably a new plugin for the EFB released with IE 7.0  rotfl 


User currently offlineBond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5417 posts, RR: 8
Reply 5, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6509 times:

Actually there was a power outage in the area. Probably what caused it. I saw it on the local news.



Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlineBritPilot777 From United Kingdom, joined Apr 2004, 1075 posts, RR: 2
Reply 6, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6510 times:

Quoting Bond007 (Reply 5):
Actually there was a power outage in the area. Probably what caused it. I saw it on the local news.

So the power outage on the ground caused the UPS 757 not to have their landing lights on??  Confused

The chaps probably just missed it on the checklists, got over the threshold and realised their landings lights were not lighting up the runway and flicked em on.

BritPilot777



Forever Flight
User currently offlineAirfoilsguy From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6508 times:

Quoting BritPilot777 (Reply 6):
The chaps probably just missed it on the checklists, got over the threshold and realised their landings lights were not lighting up the runway and flicked em on.

Can they get in trouble over such a thing?


User currently offlineLowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 8, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 11 hours ago) and read 6508 times:

Quoting Airfoilsguy (Reply 7):
Can they get in trouble over such a thing?

Only if it resulted in an incident or a check airman or Fed was observing.



Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlineMotopolitico From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 212 posts, RR: 0
Reply 9, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6509 times:

Okay, now for my next question, (please don't flame me) Having missed that part of the checklist, and only having caught it at the last minute, would they have been potentially justified in performing a go-around, just in case they had missed other important checklist items?


Garbage stinks; trash don't!
User currently offlineBond007 From United States of America, joined Mar 2005, 5417 posts, RR: 8
Reply 10, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6509 times:

Quoting BritPilot777 (Reply 6):
So the power outage on the ground caused the UPS 757 not to have their landing lights on??

....and I thought the Brits had a sense of humour  Wink



Jimbo



I'd rather be on the ground wishing I was in the air, than in the air wishing I was on the ground!
User currently offlineVC-10 From United Kingdom, joined Oct 1999, 3701 posts, RR: 34
Reply 11, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 10 hours ago) and read 6509 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I was watching one of the last Concorde landings and the crew were switching the lights on and off all along the approach until they crossed the perimeter at LHR.

Concorde didn't have those alternating lights before anybody suggests it.


User currently offlineThrottleHold From South Africa, joined Jul 2006, 657 posts, RR: 1
Reply 12, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6510 times:

We turn the landing lights on or off when passing FL100. We can turn them off for other reasons too. I've turned them off due to the disorientating effect they have when flying through cloud at night. On the A320 when they are extended they make an awful lot of vibration if flying at greater thean 250kts.
The fact that they were turned on over the threshold is due to that being the point that they noticed the runway was a bit dark. Could be hard to tell before that.

Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 1):
Of course, since the landing lights are on the 18000' checklist

Never seeen landing llights as an item on a checklist on any type I've flown.

Quoting Motopolitico (Reply 9):
Okay, now for my next question, (please don't flame me) Having missed that part of the checklist, and only having caught it at the last minute, would they have been potentially justified in performing a go-around, just in case they had missed other important checklist items?

Sorry, but I'm going to have to flame you, but I'm not going to waste my time explaining why.


User currently offlineFr8Mech From United States of America, joined Sep 2005, 5470 posts, RR: 14
Reply 13, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 9 hours ago) and read 6507 times:

Quoting ThrottleHold (Reply 12):
Never seeen landing llights as an item on a checklist on any type I've flown.

But it is on UPS.



When seconds count...the police are minutes away.
User currently offlineRoseFlyer From United States of America, joined Feb 2004, 9661 posts, RR: 52
Reply 14, posted (7 years 10 months 3 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 5870 times:

Quoting Motopolitico (Reply 9):
Okay, now for my next question, (please don't flame me) Having missed that part of the checklist, and only having caught it at the last minute, would they have been potentially justified in performing a go-around, just in case they had missed other important checklist items?

I don't think that would be an easily justifiable go around. Go arounds are costly in time and fuel.

Everyone makes mistakes. Checklists are good and useful, but it is possible to miss things.



If you have never designed an airplane part before, let the real designers do the work!
User currently offlineZBBYLW From Canada, joined Nov 2006, 1986 posts, RR: 6
Reply 15, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 19 hours ago) and read 5715 times:

Quoting Fr8Mech (Reply 13):
Quoting ThrottleHold (Reply 12):
Never seeen landing llights as an item on a checklist on any type I've flown.

But it is on UPS.

I am not sure how the FAA operates but, in Canada the CARS state that an aeroplane must have a functioning landing light while carrying passengers. Now when it comes to a UPS plane they would be flying around cargo, and thus it is not imperative to have the landing light on, although it helps drastically. Now this is again a Canadian Air Reg and might be different to that of the states. Anyone can correct me on that?



Keep the shinny side up!
User currently offlineCurmudgeon From Australia, joined Oct 2006, 695 posts, RR: 22
Reply 16, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 17 hours ago) and read 5682 times:

Does the current Canadian reg say that the light has to be functional, or "on"? The old reg stated that landing lights had to fitted to any large aircraft. The use of landing lights below 10,000 ft started way back when that defined the upper limit of "Indian country", where all the Cherokees and Comanches were. Migratory birds are observed as high as 14,000 ft. Other countries use transition level, FL180 in North America, usually lower elsewhere. There is no one standard, and a case can be made for a variety of altitudes for lights on. There also are no magical anti-collision properties of the photons;well illuminated airplanes have hit plenty of things in the past.

Crews can easily forget the lights if something more compelling is happening at the normal lights on point...like a protracted exchange on the radio, or other distraction. The measure of a top crew's performance is not whether they make errors, its how they correct the error and recover a safe operation that counts.

Selecting lights on fixes the problem. The key arrival tasks are: deciding weight-thus arrival speeds, setting auto brakes (if used), setting the altimeters, flaps, gear, arming speedbrake. Anything more important than the lights would be obvious before the flare, but good question, Motopolitico.



Jets are for kids
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 16
Reply 17, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 5673 times:

Quoting Curmudgeon (Reply 16):
There is no one standard, and a case can be made for a variety of altitudes for lights on. There also are no magical anti-collision properties of the photons;well illuminated airplanes have hit plenty of things in the past.

You said it all, for us it's the rnwy turnoff lights at 180 and the LANDING lites not until 10,000 when we slow to 250. Since thet retract they can be pretty noisy above 250kts.
Are you saying that beaming all those photons forward doesn't help slow you down? "Damn it Jim!" No wonder I keep missing those SLPs! LOL


User currently offlineBAe146QT From United Kingdom, joined Sep 2006, 996 posts, RR: 0
Reply 18, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 15 hours ago) and read 5649 times:

Quoting CosmicCruiser:
Since thet retract they can be pretty noisy above 250kts.

I don't know what you fly*, but IIRC the 737 manual agrees with you - though for a different reason. It states that the landing lights should not be extended above 250 knots because it can damage them, (or their hinges/brackets, I think).


* I just had a look at your profile. Apparently you have 737 posts currently. Spooky.



Todos mis dominós son totalmente pegajosos
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 16
Reply 19, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5625 times:

Quoting BAe146QT (Reply 18):
I don't know what you fly*, but IIRC the 737 manual agrees with you - though for a different reason.

I fly the MD-11 and there's no speed restriction on the ldg lites but it WILL get loud and since the MD-11 has a quiet cockpit as a rule it's very noticeable.


User currently offlineAogdesk From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 935 posts, RR: 3
Reply 20, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5619 times:

Straight from the horses mouth...

The 757 was doing a coupled approach/autoland, there was no crew in the cockpit to switch on the landing lights. Both capt and f/o were busy re-wrapping the Sony PS3 that they had played with during the flight.  Wink


User currently offlineLowrider From United States of America, joined Jun 2004, 3220 posts, RR: 10
Reply 21, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 13 hours ago) and read 5615 times:

Quoting Aogdesk (Reply 20):
The 757 was doing a coupled approach/autoland, there was no crew in the cockpit to switch on the landing lights. Both capt and f/o were busy re-wrapping the Sony PS3 that they had played with during the flight.

Outstanding. I just about fell out of my chair.



Proud OOTSK member
User currently offlineAirWillie6475 From United States of America, joined Jan 2005, 2448 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5565 times:

Quoting Aogdesk (Reply 20):
The 757 was doing a coupled approach/autoland, there was no crew in the cockpit to switch on the landing lights. Both capt and f/o were busy re-wrapping the Sony PS3 that they had played with during the flight. Wink

Yea it's on the news that Sony is flying PS3s instead of shipping them because of the demand.


User currently offlineMotopolitico From United States of America, joined Dec 2005, 212 posts, RR: 0
Reply 23, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 10 hours ago) and read 5556 times:

Thank you kindly for the enlightening answers. I think I'll forever be in the wannabe-pilot stage, but aviation fascinates me nevertheless. Lately at SDF the spotting's been good as runway 17R/35L have been closed weekends, forcing all traffic to use 17L/35R, where there are excellent spotting opportunities. Thanks for the informed responses.


Garbage stinks; trash don't!
User currently offlineCosmicCruiser From United States of America, joined Feb 2005, 2255 posts, RR: 16
Reply 24, posted (7 years 10 months 2 weeks 6 days 6 hours ago) and read 5482 times:

Quoting Aogdesk (Reply 20):
Straight from the horses mouth...

The 757 was doing a coupled approach/autoland, there was no crew in the cockpit to switch on the landing lights

I'd be curious who the "horse's mouth" really was. If there REALLY was no crew in the cockpit it would take a fool to admit it since that is not only a terminating offense but the FAA WILL guarantee you they wiil take away your ticket. I know of one such case and the offending crewmember was turned in and he indeed lost his job AND his license.


25 Post contains images KPIE172 : If the PIC has reason to believe that a another checklist item was missed that could potentially compromise safety he may go around if he so chooses.
26 Post contains images Aogdesk : Ummm....FYI......a winking smiley contained in a post should generally tip the reader off that the post is "tongue in cheek". Are you going to inform
27 Bingo : He's just upset because it was his PS3 they were playing....
28 Post contains images CosmicCruiser : LOL, ok you got me! Yeah, I didn't imagine it could be true but truthfully I rarely pay attention to faces. Nah, I like my Nano.
29 Aogdesk : I actually had a management guy tell me once to make sure that I turned off the lights in one of the cargo pits....so that "we can save energy". Pain
30 Sonic67 : Maybe it was a stealth approach with some top secret packages onboard. :D
31 HAWK21M : The Crew probably forgot.And realised when they got near the Surface & noticed no reflection. regds MEL
32 TheSorcerer : Are landing lights needed for landing on every runway? I thought they weren't necessary if the runway had a certain light set up. thanks Dominic
33 BrowntailWhale : Landing lights are NOT on the 757/767 checklist at UPS. Sounds like the crew forgot to turn them on during the descent and only noticed they were not
34 Fr8mech : Funny, I thought the lights were on all the fleet types. I haven't jumped on a B757/767 in several years, but spent a lot of time on the MD11 & A300.
35 BAe146QT : I suspect that having your tongue in someone elses' cheek would be a violation though.
36 Post contains images Aogdesk : We need some willing participants to test the waters and report back......any takers?
37 Post contains images MDorBust : Perhaps the crew had recently left the Airforce and were used to flying Baghdad approaches.
38 Fr8mech : From the B757/B767 AOM: "At 18,000 feet (FL180), position wing landing light switches to on." While not a 'checklist' item, it is an AOM procedure.
39 ThrottleHold : Technically, that's an ROP, not an SOP.
40 Lowrider : Only if I get to choose my study partner.
41 Corey07850 : Well I've done a bunch of no-landing light approaches to touchdown in light GA aircraft just for training and what-not... Doubt this is what they were
42 Fr8mech : And an 'ROP' is what?
43 HAWK21M : Whats an R.O.P. regds MEL
44 BAe146QT : [guess mode] Recommended Operating Procedure? [/guess mode]
45 Airfoilsguy : It's an ROP not SOP only during IFR simply for CUA unless The CIP catches you then you are SOL ASAP
46 BAe146QT : But that's only if you're carrying the VP, who is a VIP.
47 Aogdesk : Doesn't help if he happens to be an SOB.
48 BAe146QT : Well then it's just best to go MIA.
49 HAWK21M : How does it Vary. regds MEL
50 Sudden : You better cause it can be the CEO of the FAA sent out by the NTSB to check out the PIC. Aim for the sky! Sudden
51 BAe146QT : You could distract him by asking your FO to provide some IFE in the WC.
52 Sudden : LOL! Aim for the sky! Sudden
53 Freedom747 : No exterior lights on? Ehhhh, who needs them, anyway? Day or nite, rain or shine.....just ask US Airways or American.
54 Post contains images HAWK21M : Is this another cost saving exercise regds MEL
Top Of Page
Forum Index

Reply To This Topic UPS 757 Landing At Night W/o Lights?
Username:
No username? Sign up now!
Password: 


Forgot Password? Be reminded.
Remember me on this computer (uses cookies)
  • Tech/Ops related posts only!
  • Not Tech/Ops related? Use the other forums
  • No adverts of any kind. This includes web pages.
  • No hostile language or criticizing of others.
  • Do not post copyright protected material.
  • Use relevant and describing topics.
  • Check if your post already been discussed.
  • Check your spelling!
  • DETAILED RULES
Add Images Add SmiliesPosting Help

Please check your spelling (press "Check Spelling" above)


Similar topics:More similar topics...
No Lights At Night posted Mon Mar 4 2002 20:02:35 by David B.
Does Engine Exhaust Glow At Night? posted Fri Aug 18 2006 15:04:45 by CURLYHEADBOY
Zero Flap Landing At TRF Today (Ryanair) posted Tue May 16 2006 21:51:38 by MerlinIIIB
Flight Deck Lighting At Night posted Tue Feb 21 2006 11:06:10 by NWOrientDC10
Landing And Taxi Lights? posted Sun Sep 11 2005 14:17:09 by Qantas744ER
Landing At Heathrow posted Wed Jul 13 2005 00:46:35 by Rwylie77
How Much Can You Tell By Looking At The Lights? posted Thu Sep 2 2004 18:19:05 by Vywh
Landing At NCE posted Tue May 18 2004 06:57:56 by VS346
Landing At Heathrow. posted Wed Feb 11 2004 19:56:00 by Codeshare
Hard Landing At SNA posted Thu Oct 30 2003 06:29:53 by FlyLAX

Sponsor Message:
Printer friendly format