DC-9/MD80 pilots...

[aa73]

When is it a good time to turn on your wing landing lights for landing? So far I've heard:

-coming down through 10,000 (youch, still doing 250kts, they vibrate like hell!)

-when extending the slats

- below 220 kts,

-cleared for the approach or cleared for landing

-some don't use them at all, they just use the Nose lights on BRIGHT.

Opinions?

thanks,
73

p.s. I'm researching this out of curiosity. At AA we are discouraged from using these lights for fuel savings and "buffetting".

 

[RJones]

Just wondering ... how much fuel do you think AA will save?

 

[aa73]

Just wondering ... how much fuel do you think AA will save?

Exactly. You're talking about the nickel and dime experts here - after all, they saved how many $$ thousands by eliminating one olive from the salads?

Not saying I agree with our procedure. Just curious how everyone else does it.

 

[semperfido]

some things just don't matter.

 

[AA717driver]

At my former employer , we did it at gear down. The vibration causes the filiment to break. That's where the cost comes in. The incidence of burnt out lights dropped dramatically when we changed the policy.

With strobes and ice lights on, there's plenty of illumination.TC

 

[AKMD80GUY]

We put the wing lights out at 10,000. In fact we turn all the lights on at 10,000. Yeh they make for a less than smooth ride but it's not that bad. We had one MEL'd in the down position and it wasn't that bad of a ride at 310/.760

 

[Big Air]

"10K, Speed and Lights".

If you want to bring her down a little faster, bring the lights out sooner.

 

[aa73]

Thanks Guys!

 

[Jurassic Jet]

We leave our lights on climbing thru 10K and then back on again descending thru 10K. Of course, the majority of time our 9's are flying is nightime. I just don't think the fuel savings would be significant. Descending out of 10 you are usually at flight idle anyways (well, we are).

I really don't think the vibration is that bad from the lights. Of course I've never had a box come up and tap me on the shoulder and complain.

Trust me, if it saved fuel or money, we would be doing it. That's how copper wire was invented. Two of our managers fighting over a penny.:laugh:

BTW, I don't think the fuel savings on the olives were significant enough for him, so I think he eliminated all of them and saved $40,000 per year. I just finished that book not long ago.

 

[say again]

"10K, Speed and Lights".

If you want to bring her down a little faster, bring the lights out sooner.

Come on, you guys don't slow down!!!!:laugh:

 

[aa73]

We leave our lights on climbing thru 10K and then back on again descending thru 10K. Of course, the majority of time our 9's are flying is nightime. I just don't think the fuel savings would be significant. Descending out of 10 you are usually at flight idle anyways (well, we are).

I really don't think the vibration is that bad from the lights. Of course I've never had a box come up and tap me on the shoulder and complain.

Trust me, if it saved fuel or money, we would be doing it. That's how copper wire was invented. Two of our managers fighting over a penny.:laugh:

BTW, I don't think the fuel savings on the olives were significant enough for him, so I think he eliminated all of them and saved $40,000 per year. I just finished that book not long ago.

I think it's a great idea and procedure - unfortunately, our management is more concerned about burning out bulbs, along with the (ridiculously) low extra fuel consumption.

This is the reason you will see, a lot of times, some of our MD80s taking off from DFW or ORD with just the Nose lights on bright, and then when the gear retracts, badabing! we have a stealth jet.

(Occasionally we'll have some takeoffs where the F/Os even forget to turn on the ground floods and wing/nacelle lights, so now they are TOTALLY dark except for strobes and beacons.) This is because the use of those lights is at pilots discretion, they are not mandatory.

 

[Spooky 1]

Not factoring in the vibration from things sticking out the side of your airplane a'la MD products and the lower fuselage lights on the B737NG's, why has someone come up with the 10,000' number of light illumination? seems like FL180 would be better since that is the floor of controoled airspace. Any thoughts on this reasoning would be appreciated. BTW, I'm in favor of the FL180 number in case you can't tell already.

 

[Jurassic Jet]

Not factoring in the vibration from things sticking out the side of your airplane a'la MD products and the lower fuselage lights on the B737NG's, why has someone come up with the 10,000' number of light illumination? seems like FL180 would be better since that is the floor of controoled airspace. Any thoughts on this reasoning would be appreciated. BTW, I'm in favor of the FL180 number in case you can't tell already.

No clue where that number came from. Maybe just a nice round number.

Our procedure is to turn on the wing/nacelle/turnoff lights out of FL180, then the landing lights come on at 10K, nose taxi lights come on with a landing clearance.

 

[Lead Sled]

FWIW, we run our pulse lights below FL180 day or night.

'Sled

 

[Lead Sled]

At my former employer , we did it at gear down. The vibration causes the filiment to break.

I used to do it that way as well (15 years ago) then one day a mechanic told us to mount the bulbs with the filaments vertical instead of horizontal (we had the option) and bingo, the problem went away.

'Sled