Some consideration please QF
Thread Starter
Some consideration please QF
I know it's undoubtedly SOP, and therefore not the pilots fault, but it would be nice if Qantas would consider others and remove the SOP of wing inspection lights on whilst on the ground at night. They are very, very bright, and being as they point outwards from the aircraft, they are extremely blinding to say the least to other pilots on the tarmac.
I've had enough of having my night vision stuffed up. Its obviously aimed at high visibility - but a little bit over the top I think. It is quite simply a hazard to others.
Thank you.
Trev
I've had enough of having my night vision stuffed up. Its obviously aimed at high visibility - but a little bit over the top I think. It is quite simply a hazard to others.
Thank you.
Trev
I don't disagree with what you are saying, Trev. However Pprune is not really the ideal forum to voice your concerns/get policy of an airline changed. I'd suggest you submit safety related paperwork through your company and they can then approach Eurocontrol, FAA and AirServices Australia (the three organisations involved in the recommendations) to have the policy changed.
Rgds.
Rgds.
Last edited by OneDotLow; 23rd Oct 2009 at 22:16. Reason: to clarify who issued the lighting recommendations.
How did ICAO/CASA drive this change?
I would think they would be more interested in the potential non compliance associated with not displaying nav lights during the day in IMC, and unless QF group aeroplanes turn their nav lights on and off as they go through cloud, I would think that by not just turning them on and leaving them on they are technically non compliant
I say technically as I dont think anyone really gives a crap, but if they are changing procedures to meet an obscure requirement I would think a slightly less obscure requirement would get a look in!
I would think they would be more interested in the potential non compliance associated with not displaying nav lights during the day in IMC, and unless QF group aeroplanes turn their nav lights on and off as they go through cloud, I would think that by not just turning them on and leaving them on they are technically non compliant
I say technically as I dont think anyone really gives a crap, but if they are changing procedures to meet an obscure requirement I would think a slightly less obscure requirement would get a look in!
How did ICAO/CASA drive this change?
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: QLD
Posts: 173
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Geeeeeezzzz, how many different threads are going to be started on this. 
As Keg has said in response to every thread on this issue, it is a SOP and hence there is no use asking line pilots from discontinuing the practice!
If you don't like it do something worthwile apart from bleating on pprune.
As Keg has said in response to every thread on this issue, it is a SOP and hence there is no use asking line pilots from discontinuing the practice!
If you don't like it do something worthwile apart from bleating on pprune.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Usually Oz
Posts: 732
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poor airmanship?
FGD135, you have to realise that airmanship is no more.
It's been replaced by SOP's which completely cover all aspects of every operation thus rendering the officials of any operator fully innocent of any potential liability for negligence.
Can you even imagine what would happen in this world if commonsense [aka airmanship] were left to prevail among that undisciplined rabble know as Line Pilots??
The World would end!
It's only when you are let into the BIG PICTURE that you can even begin to grasp these things.
So, Vale Airmanship and stick to those SOP's; that way, you'll never be wrong!
G'day
It's been replaced by SOP's which completely cover all aspects of every operation thus rendering the officials of any operator fully innocent of any potential liability for negligence.
Can you even imagine what would happen in this world if commonsense [aka airmanship] were left to prevail among that undisciplined rabble know as Line Pilots??
The World would end!It's only when you are let into the BIG PICTURE that you can even begin to grasp these things.
So, Vale Airmanship and stick to those SOP's; that way, you'll never be wrong!
G'day
Nunc est bibendum
Sounds like poor airmanship.
Captain Peter Wilson
Chief Pilot
QCC 3
Qantas Airways Ltd
203 Coward St
Mascot, NSW, 2020
ATSB
1800 020 616
Tel: (02) 6257 4150
Tel International: +61 2 6257 4150
Fax: (02) 6247 3117
Email: [email protected]
REPCON Confidential Reporting:1800 020 505.
I'll say it again. Only if enough people complain- in places where it will actually do some good as opposed to here on PPRUNE- will something be done.
Until that time I have a choice. I can operate as per the SOP and potentially affect someone else's night vision (although given how many lights there are around an airfield I'd find that doubtful anyway but I acknowledge the annoyance factor) or I can have tea and bikkies for not following the SOP that is supposedly worlds best practise and an FAA/ JAA recommendation.
Hmmm. Which should I choose.
If you think it is a not a good idea - don't do it.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In this case the sop is a horses ass. (Or an asses ass if you prefer) does not enhance safety at all and as has been pointed out, can be a hazard. Basic airmanship should NEVER be userped by piontless arse covering regulation.
Nothing to stop a polite request over the rt "can you please turn your lights off shaggs?" most would happily do so. If not ASIR, stuff em.
Nothing to stop a polite request over the rt "can you please turn your lights off shaggs?" most would happily do so. If not ASIR, stuff em.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I'll say it again. Only if enough people complain- in places where it will actually do some good as opposed to here on PPRuNe- will something be done.
J
Basic airmanship should NEVER be userped by piontless arse covering regulation
If it's in the Ops Manual and it isn't about to kill you I would suggest you would have to follow it regardless of what your opinion is.
Join Date: May 2005
Location: oz
Posts: 307
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ummm no. But if you can see that the quiet pointless (I think we all agree) use of wing lights is blinding and or pissing off the Virgin guys at the holding point . . . . . Tun them off?????
If you want to get wound up about manuals. The CAR, CAO and ops manual also contains a few paragraphs giving the captain a fair bit of discretionary latitude.
Bet you don't cover both ears with your headset?? Another unpractical ass covering oh&s sop.
Tea and bickies? For turning off wing lights?
Come on Nev.
If you want to get wound up about manuals. The CAR, CAO and ops manual also contains a few paragraphs giving the captain a fair bit of discretionary latitude.
Bet you don't cover both ears with your headset?? Another unpractical ass covering oh&s sop.
Tea and bickies? For turning off wing lights?
Come on Nev.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Roguesville, cloud cuckooland
Posts: 1,197
Likes: 0
Received 16 Likes
on
5 Posts
Don't you just love it when a new management proclamation is justified as "World's best Practice." That effectively means, "Don't argue!"
QF management issued a FSO recently regarding the Radio Pratique pilots must observe when returning to the country and informing Quarantine of illness on board.
Not a lot of thought went into this FSO which required pilots to report if they were carrying a live animal into Australia and if an animal had died on board during the flight...
I realise that this requirement did not originate in QF, but it really should have been questioned before release to the troops.
QF management issued a FSO recently regarding the Radio Pratique pilots must observe when returning to the country and informing Quarantine of illness on board.
Not a lot of thought went into this FSO which required pilots to report if they were carrying a live animal into Australia and if an animal had died on board during the flight...
I realise that this requirement did not originate in QF, but it really should have been questioned before release to the troops.
If you want to get wound up about manuals. The CAR, CAO and ops manual also contains a few paragraphs giving the captain a fair bit of discretionary latitude
Tea and bickies? For turning off wing lights?
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Melb, Oz.
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taxying at ADL the other night and had a QF 737 taxying opposite direction parallel and saw he was lit up like a xmas tree. Thought to self "here we go another blinder coming up!" As they approached abeam us wing inspection and rwy turnoff lights went off. Once passed on they went again. That is common sense and courtesy. Thanks boys/girls for that, just don't know why your heavier cousins don't seem to think the same way.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: They seek him here, they seek him there
Posts: 141
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The recently revamped QF lights policy originally did not require the wing lights to be on unless entering/crossing a runway. I believe this element was based on FAA/Eurocontrol/AsA recommendations.
It was then revised to require the wing lights be on at all times during taxi to 10,000ft and vice versa. Apparently this was after many comments about excessive swithcing required during taxi. This revision moved away from the "Worlds Best Practice".
I agree with Keg, if this is a problem for others please put it in writing in the form of ASIR/REPCON and perhaps some external pressure can be placed on QF to change it.
It was then revised to require the wing lights be on at all times during taxi to 10,000ft and vice versa. Apparently this was after many comments about excessive swithcing required during taxi. This revision moved away from the "Worlds Best Practice".
I agree with Keg, if this is a problem for others please put it in writing in the form of ASIR/REPCON and perhaps some external pressure can be placed on QF to change it.