A320 landing light inoperative
 

folks, I have never landed with landing lights inoperative at night.. other day, i found before a night flight that landing lights were unserviceable, i told AME to repair it but he insisted he would release the flight under MEL... I was equally adamant, finally after 1hr delay he gave up and changed the bulbs...

I really wonder how it would feel to land at night without landing lights... especially when it is raining over the field...

can you throw some light out of your experience..

cheers

Training
 

Not really as hard as you think, using your peripheral vision and looking adequately down the runway, you can get quite good at it, military crews do it all the time, my flight instructor turned the landing light off on my first night flight to get me acquainted when it burns out. :ok:

well that would be interresting to say the least...i'm tempted to try it out at least during the last stages of the landing tomorrow..dunno if i will have the guts to complete the landing without them
anyway... will let you know about the results but i'm sure it will be extremely uncomfortable

re the OP - ALL the landing lights were inop, and you were released for a night flight???

I don't have access to an A320 MMEL (TC hasn't put the airbus MMELs online yet) but a quick check of ours indicates that all lights inop is only permitted as follows:
I'm a bit perplexed that anyone managed to get all the lights inop onto the MEL.... if I read your post correctly.

I'm with my fellow madman.

Can the MEL really be read to say that no landing lights are required for night flight?

If so then get rid of the little buggers at once and reduce weight as well as complexity.

All the Boeings I've operated over many years required at least a couple for night work.

Faa A320 MMEL
 

FYI:
40-02
Landing Lights (installed) 2 (required)1 Notes: One may be inoperative provided nose, taxi and takeoff lights operate normally.
May be inoperative for day operations.

Retraction Systems (installed) 2 (required) 0 Notes:(O) May be inoperative provided a 1% fuel penalty is applied for each extended light.

I have landed a 320 multiple times with one of the two landing lights under the wing inop, didn't really notice much of a difference. That was just because I was working on a wet lease with 2 aircraft, one had the light inop, so flew it quite often; released as per MEL.

Maybe if you had asked, and not told the AME to replace the filaments, you would have got a better response?

Well said Lee, I'm not a fan of being TOLD what to do. That said, I am surprised that the a/c was gonna be released with all the landing lights u/s. Any mel I've operated off wouldn't allow release with two landing lights u/s on one side,esp for night flight.

Just curious, were ALL the landing lights u/s?

a320 landing light inop
 

all lights inop =no release for night flt....well thats how it is over here but yes if you spoke to the LAME in a nice way he/she might of change a LAMP its not a bulb they live in the cabin:ok:

Landed at night with LDG LTs not ON many times, usually because I switched them off for approach to minima in poor vis and forgot to switch them on when visual.

Usually results in a bit of a crunch on touchdown but no problem apart from embarrassment.

Try looking farther down the runway next time. :ok:

I'm with Gary Lager. It's not so much of a problem, depending generally on your landing technic. Some people, especially young/unexperienced pilots seem to have problems without. It all depends how much of depth you can perceive if your tarmac is not illuminated in front of you. Me I use the radio altimeter count down a lot, so I don't really need the visual cues of an approaching tarmac that much. It's maybe a thing you have to train an odd time, first with only one landing light out, then you get the feeling.

Fly safe,
Dani

cool idea..
 

that would be cool.. next night flight, i am gonna try with one landing light off and later with both...

thanks a lot you all....

I'm sure I would look down the runway if it was possible to see anything in that direction...d'oh!

If I'm not mistaken, the A320 has NOSE landing lights as well, correct?

So why not just use the nose landing lights at night with the MAIN landing lights inop (under the wings.) We used to do this on the MD80. Some captains did not like using the wing retractable/extendable landing lights at night because of the vibration one felt in flight. So they would just use the nose landing light, which was plenty bright when selected to the BRIGHT position. Plus the wing landing lights did not illuminate the runway that well, since they were so far outboard under the wing tips.

Just an idea.
73

Contrary is true. Runway turn-off, taxi, and TO LT. Some of us may use the TO LT for landing, but it is not a manufacturer recommended procedure and indeed has no benefits (after a small tech/academic discussion).

FD (the un-real)

Why contrary? He says the same as you. Is this some sort of a double negation which I don't understand?

As stated above, if you have lost one landing light, you have to have the nose landing light - and I guess you would use it.

Why wouldn't it help, FD?

Dani

Exactly my sentiments. Old school, maybe?

Because there is no LANDING LIGHT mounted on NW strut.

http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?t=321207 ;)

Perhaps I am mistaken, then we need some tech spec, where is IFixPlanes when you need him?

If one LDG lt is inop, surely it is mandatory to have both taxi and TO serviceable. Once at the MMEL, it is worth mentioning that for u/s TO lt, there is no restriction.