91.205???

[Tug Driver]

My question deals with FAR 91.205(b)(11)

In regards to the red rotating becon light and the white anticollision lights:

My aircraft which is a 1974 model, has a red rotating becon on the tail as well as a white strobe (anticollison?) on the belly.

In the event that my red becon is INOP. Will the white strobe on the belly suffice as the anticollison lighting system??

I guess that I need a definition of an anticollision light...

Can anyone help?
Thanks

 

[pilotman2105]

14 CFR 23.1401

My guess is that one on the belly of the aircraft would not be legit according to this reg.

Edit: Corrected the Reg number to 23.1401. Appears as though I've had a few too many to drink this evening.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I think that pilotman2105 is correct. If the airprlane has a red rotating beacon, that's the anticollision light that 91.205 (and the other regulations that deal with it) is talking about. You might get an answer based on the way the two lights are described in the airplane's equiment list. One may be described as (R)equired and the other (O)ptional.

BTW, don't limit yourself to 91.205(b)(11). Don't forget that you need working anticollision lights on that airplane for day VFR also. (or do you suffer from "burning tomato syndrome"?)

 

[F70pilot]

I strongly suggest that you get a copy of the MMEL (master minimum equipment list.) The FAA has one for every aircraft make and model. It will list any authorizations for inoperative equipment for your aircraft.

 

[midlifeflyer]

I strongly suggest that you get a copy of the MMEL (master minimum equipment list.) The FAA has one for every aircraft make and model. It will list any authorizations for inoperative equipment for your aircraft.

He shouldn't need to. If the specific airplane has a MEL, he should have access to it and knows the answer. The MMEL doesn't apply automatically to anything.

 

[F70pilot]

You're right. But I think that if he had an MEL for his aircraft he may not have asked the question. I suggested the MMEL as a place to start in case he didn't have access to the aircraft specific document.

 

[pilotman2105]

Burning tomato syndrome?

 

[midlifeflyer]

Burning tomato syndrome?

An informal survey I did suggests that pilots (not including professional commercial pilots) who learned TOMATO FLAMES or a similar 91.205 mnemonic tend to get required equipment questions wrong more often than those who do. For example, a pilot asked whether he can fly an airplane with the beacon inoperative during day VFR conditions is more likely to incorrectly say "yes" without considering 91.209 or other factors.

 

[pilotman2105]

Interesting insight.

 

[DAS at 10/250]

There is no requirement for any light to be mounted on the vertical stabilizer. A belly strobe would be just fine.