Runway lighting Spacing
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Australia
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Runway lighting Spacing
Looking at Runway lighting at various airports. No where can I find what the spacing is. Where as I am told on airports overseas the runway light spacing is specified for runway edge and center line lighting for each airport and it is normally on the page indicating what the Take-Off minimas are.. Am I looking at the wrong place if so could somebody please enlighten me.
Thanks
new
Thanks
new
.... and centreline lighting is 30 metres, except that if runway is intended to support CAT III operations or take-offs with RVR below 400 metres, spacing should be 15 metres.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: in the classroom of life
Age: 55
Posts: 6,864
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Great thread, I am about to look into some solar powered lights, and was about to think about rough numbers required.
Made that job easier for budgeting
Made that job easier for budgeting
In the UK all the necessary characteristics and design parameters for aerodromes are set out in CAP 168 http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/33/CAP168.PDF I imagine the rest of the world will be pretty similar
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: GPS Signal Lost
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New ifr, you need too slow down a bit, take a deep breath, and just accept the fact that the airport authorities will provide the lighting required
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Australia
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ TCAS FAN - "Standard edge lighting spacing for instrument runways is 60 metres."
Be careful with that statement, as an example Taree used to be 90 metre spacing, I doubt anything has changed.
Not many country "IFR" airports are 60 metres.
Be careful with that statement, as an example Taree used to be 90 metre spacing, I doubt anything has changed.
Not many country "IFR" airports are 60 metres.
Assuming that we are talking about international airports within ICAO Contracting States, each State will be a signatory to the ICAO Convention, Article 38 of which requires each State to notify Differences to the ICAO Standards. In the case of lighting, Standards are set out in ICAO Annex 14, Volume 1, at Chapter 5. Courtesy of a friendly State, link to this document is below
http://dcaa.trafikstyrelsen.dk:8000/...n%20no%205.pdf
All you want to know about lighting, but maybe were too afraid to ask?
If a particular State does not comply (ie meet the minimum) with a Standard a summary of Differences is contained in a Supplement to the Annex, specifying the nature of the Difference. Assuming that ICAO has been notified.
If you find that a particular State does not comply, and the Supplement does not notify it, speak to your aircraft's State of Registry regulator. They have the right to take the matter up either directly with the State or via ICAO.
http://dcaa.trafikstyrelsen.dk:8000/...n%20no%205.pdf
All you want to know about lighting, but maybe were too afraid to ask?
If a particular State does not comply (ie meet the minimum) with a Standard a summary of Differences is contained in a Supplement to the Annex, specifying the nature of the Difference. Assuming that ICAO has been notified.
If you find that a particular State does not comply, and the Supplement does not notify it, speak to your aircraft's State of Registry regulator. They have the right to take the matter up either directly with the State or via ICAO.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have a look at the Manual of standards Part 139
Manual of Standards Part 139 - Aerodromes
Chapter 9 covers airfield lighting and 9.10.4 states:
9.10.4 Longitudinal Spacing of Runway Edge Lights
9.10.4.1 The longitudinal spacing of runway edge lights must be uniform and be:
(a) for an instrument runway, 60 m +0 / -5 m;
(b) for a non-instrument runway, 90 m ± 10 m, or 60 m +0 / -5 m if there is an intention to upgrade the runway to an instrument runway at some time in the future.
(c) for non-precision instrument runways intended to be used in visibility conditions of 1.5 km or greater, where existing edge lights are spaced at 90 m ±10 m, it is acceptable to retain this spacing until the next replacement or improvement of the edge lighting system. (This situation typically arises from an existing non-instrument runway being upgraded to a non-precision instrument runway, but without re-installing the runway edge lights to the 60 m +0 / -5 m standard.)
Hope this helps
Manual of Standards Part 139 - Aerodromes
Chapter 9 covers airfield lighting and 9.10.4 states:
9.10.4 Longitudinal Spacing of Runway Edge Lights
9.10.4.1 The longitudinal spacing of runway edge lights must be uniform and be:
(a) for an instrument runway, 60 m +0 / -5 m;
(b) for a non-instrument runway, 90 m ± 10 m, or 60 m +0 / -5 m if there is an intention to upgrade the runway to an instrument runway at some time in the future.
(c) for non-precision instrument runways intended to be used in visibility conditions of 1.5 km or greater, where existing edge lights are spaced at 90 m ±10 m, it is acceptable to retain this spacing until the next replacement or improvement of the edge lighting system. (This situation typically arises from an existing non-instrument runway being upgraded to a non-precision instrument runway, but without re-installing the runway edge lights to the 60 m +0 / -5 m standard.)
Hope this helps
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Australia
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Captahab,
Not sure if that question was for me and i cant exactly answer it with certainty but i do know with a lot of things in the MOS139 there are dispensations for pre-existing stuff.
Eg: if the lights have been 90m spacing for 10yrs and the rule about the lights came out 9yrs ago then as the were per-existing to the new requirements they may be given a dispensation until its time to upgrade/replace them
Don't take this as gospel but i believe its how a lot of stuff at older airfields work or it would require many many millions of dollars to move taxiways/terminals/roads/apron lights each time an amendment was made for different spacing
Not sure if that question was for me and i cant exactly answer it with certainty but i do know with a lot of things in the MOS139 there are dispensations for pre-existing stuff.
Eg: if the lights have been 90m spacing for 10yrs and the rule about the lights came out 9yrs ago then as the were per-existing to the new requirements they may be given a dispensation until its time to upgrade/replace them
Don't take this as gospel but i believe its how a lot of stuff at older airfields work or it would require many many millions of dollars to move taxiways/terminals/roads/apron lights each time an amendment was made for different spacing
Captahab
Unless the approach minima is specified as "circling minima", ie you are making an instrument approach to the airport, not a specified runway, the runways have to be designated as instrument runways. If the approach charts specify a runway to each RNAV procedure, it must be an instrument runway that you are making the approach to.
Check your AIP (Oz?) it will specify any Differences from ICAO Annex 14, and explain what has been used nationally. If no Difference is shown and no other references appear in the AIP to explain an apparent greater runway edge light spacing, I'd contact your regulator for an explanation.
Unless the approach minima is specified as "circling minima", ie you are making an instrument approach to the airport, not a specified runway, the runways have to be designated as instrument runways. If the approach charts specify a runway to each RNAV procedure, it must be an instrument runway that you are making the approach to.
Check your AIP (Oz?) it will specify any Differences from ICAO Annex 14, and explain what has been used nationally. If no Difference is shown and no other references appear in the AIP to explain an apparent greater runway edge light spacing, I'd contact your regulator for an explanation.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Behind a CB near you
Age: 44
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mount Isa has 90m spacing and has VOR, NDB, DGA and RNAV approaches. The 90m spacing is mentioned specifically in ERSA for MA.
Without looking at the AIP for a reference, in addition to what was quoted from the CASA MOS, it mentions a couple of runways that whilst they are "Instrument Runways" they are also classified as country airports and only have 90m spacing. Broome is another from memory (I stand to be corrected on that)
Edit: I guess MA and Broome fall into one of the categories Gav just mentioned.
Without looking at the AIP for a reference, in addition to what was quoted from the CASA MOS, it mentions a couple of runways that whilst they are "Instrument Runways" they are also classified as country airports and only have 90m spacing. Broome is another from memory (I stand to be corrected on that)
Edit: I guess MA and Broome fall into one of the categories Gav just mentioned.
If he is new to IFR it would be kinda nice for him to be able to count the 14 lights required visibility though.
Hope you don't mean counting 14 lights to check he has the required visibility to land at the DA
?
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Australia
Age: 75
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ERSA only stipulates the light spacing if it doesn't meet the current standard as per MOS 139. For example, the Mt Isa runway has 90 metre edge light spacing, which met the applicable standard when it was installed back in the late 60s.
