How is that relevant to being able to see the 15m centerline lights before accelerating past 60kts? Which is what Rudderthing was using to justify not needing to meet the legal lighting requirements for a LVTO.

Once you've rejected a take off you're not taking off anymore, are you?!

Spandex,

My problem is you saying you have to taxi down a runway first to see a centre line light before you commence takeoff.

A blazing set of Cat3 touchdown lights is superior to just 15m centre lights. We need the 15m centre lights because for some part of the takeoff you will use them. That's why they are needed as a basic minimum. Let me put it another way. Where in EU-OPS does it say you must commence the takeoff from the first 15m centre light ? It says you commence takeoff when you have established a visual cue of 90 m

Do you always use the legally required red stop end lights on a every night takeoff ? No. but must you have them because its a legal requirement yes. Do you always use the standby power system for the ILS ? No. but must you have it because its a legal requirement yes.

You base your performance on a formally declared TODA which is based on particular published holding points. In many cases that has nothing to do with the beginning of the runway threshold hence you would bust your performance with no way to recalculate.

You know when people jump in halfway through a conversation and make an arse of themselves...

Well dear Rudderthing wasn't talking about a rejected take off was he. Which is why I said, and I quote, "your 60kts thing".

You understand the difference between accelerating to 60kts and decelerating to 60kts I hope.

8
Hang on, where are the touch down lights in relation to the displaced threshold? You need the 15m lights and the 90m visual segment and etc.. Not just one, or two or whatever you feel like. Where in EUOPS does it say you only need the 90m segment?

It's called EFB. Runway shortening XXXm from the beginning or the end. Calculate.

Just quoting this post as it's easier than cut and paste.

Where does it say you only need to meet one of these requirements?

John, go and read the thread again paying particular attention to Rudderthings posts. That is the 60kts thing I am referring to. We are NOT talking about RTOs.

Never mind, I'll quote it for you and highlight the relevant bit.

Thanks for your contribution though:ok:

Touchdown lights continue up to 3000 ft after the threshold on a cat2/3 runway !

Yes you have to have 15m lights on the runway and working. Where does it say you have to establish the 90m visual only with the use of 15m centre line lighting ?

At what point did I suggest removing any of those requirements ?

So now you are going to manually adjust your EFB outside the declared holding point distances in LVP's are you.

Seriously John, thanks.

So Rudderthing, doesn't have relevant RVRs OR the legal lighting requirements if he's starting from the beginning of the threshold as there are no RVRs reported until the TDZ. :=

Yep, the displaced threshold. If you're starting your roll from the beginning of the Tarmac then you haven't even got touch down lights have you?

It doesn't say that. It says that you need both.

Not sure what you mean by outside? Obviously we use the worst case.

and you do have both for the 4th time !

15m centre line lights plus a 90m segment. They don't turn the centre line lights off because I used the touchdown lights to ascertain the 90m visual do they ?.

Cat2/3 approach lights on a displaced threshold are also set at 30m barretts. So no difference is there

You only have both by the time you've gone 400m, in the case of 08R at least. You think it's acceptable to be charging off for quarter of a mile without relevant RVRs AND lighting when you can only see 90m? And you can't tell me you can see the correct lights through 400m of fog either, how'd you know they're even working?!

Barrett's aren't centerline lights though are they?

Well even if you do your strange taxi how do you know there working at the midpoint or stop end ?

barretts are an acceptable means of establishing a 90 m visual segment. You need to see 3 of them. There lights just like your centre line lights. Used for runway navigation. Are you aware of the famous cases of aircraft lining up on the runway edge lights thinking they were the centre lights. Never happened when visual with the approach/touchdown lights. You stick to your legal minimum philosophy and I'll stick to mine.

and when did I say you you could go without relevant RVR's

I think it's safe to assume that if you can see that the lights are working then they're working.

Yes you can measure 90m with Barrett's but they still don't meet the 15m spacing requirement do they?

Where are the the RVRs reported? TDZ, MID, STOPEND. Wheres your RVR report for the displaced threshold?

Are you for real ?

How is 3 x 30 different to 6 x 15. Either you have 90m or you don't.

Touchdown RVR is catered for by the specific LVP holding points approved by the authority for LVP departures irrespective of displaced threshold. If that threshold was to be a problem the affected holding point wouldn't have been approved for runway line up in the first place.

Get off the 90m thing will you. I don't care how you work it out. But you need that AND 15m centerline lights. Look at the damn requirements. You can't just ignore some of them.

Specific LVP holding points are for ILS protection. They are not a suggestion of where you should depart from.

So you've still got an unassessed section of runway, no relevant RVR and you are not meeting the lighting requirements for a LVTO. Yet you're still going are you?

I had the same question asked to me in an intvu

No where is it mentioned if it is allowed or it is not allowed.
However all LVP documents mention standard taxi routes to take for Arr as well as DEP
VIDP has LVP for 4 Months starting DEC to FEB.
If one happens to see the jepps for it Rwy29 is equipd for LVP and the taxi takes you to Z2 . Which happens to be an intersection. It is the standard taxi taken/Given/Accepted to one and all DOM/INTL/GA op's

Rwy 29 has a 3k ft displaced thrsld.

Well Bucks this Spandex character wants to taxi all the way down that 3000ft displaced threshold until he sees his 15 M centre line light. Therefore having no runway left to take off on !

Interview failed for him.

LVP holding points are most certainly designed for line up ground operations as well as arrivals with strict line up lighting system for that too. Spandex you don't have the first clue what you are talking about and are staring to embarrass yourself.

Read what he wrote 8. You don't get to line up at the beginning of the runway so no need to taxy all the way down the 3000' displacement. Why is there no runway left? Is the runway only 3000' long? Nope, it's 12,500'. You've forgotten your lesson about performance haven't you.

Hold points are for ILS protection. They are where you enter the runway from, if you don't satisfy all the requirements for LVTO you can't depart. End of story.

Still, if you want to depart without relevant RVRs AND lighting then your choice. Wrong, but your choice.

This comes around every now and then in our airline, usually when the AWOPS part of the sim ends up at LGW. I have canvassed the opinions of other line pilots, trainers and standards guys: the main consensus seems to be that you could *interpret* the rules (as there is no statement as such) to mean you have to taxi forward until you get to an area of 15m lighting but in reality it would be a pointless thing to do, as you've already assessed the visibility as being adequate from where you're starting from, otherwise you wouldn't be taking off. Most of the TREs regard it as an interesting discussion point, rather than a pass/fail item. Practicality is the word here.

Interestingly, I've just looked at the NATS documentation for LGW and it seems like the whole of the runway is now 15m spacing - any LGW regulars able to confirm/refute that? ATC certainly expect you to be able to use M/M3 in LVPs...

You can't use pilot assessment if RVRs are below 150m. Minimum reported RVRs of 125m are required for the ENTIRE take off run which you won't have on a displaced threshold.

Ok, so the 15 m CL thing has been done to death now. I see both sides, Spandex vs. The Others. Depends on 1) How you interpret the rules and 2) How strictly you apply the rules, as someone said their is a blazing set of CAT3 lights for orientation even if you technically don't have 15 m spaced CL lights.

So next question. Can RVR readings be substituted by pilot assesment for 125 m LVTO? I am not talking about the 90 m visual segment, but the actual RVR measureing.

172, no you can't. You need reported RVRs for the entire take off run if the RVRs are below 150m. Ergo, you must start your take off at a position which has a reported RVR.

Thus the implication is that you can't start your take off at the beginning of the runway if there is a displaced threshold because you're not meeting ALL of the requirements for a take off below 150m RVR. Furthermore, you still need the 90m visual segment which equates to 6 lights if you're starting at the correct point.

From our Part A (UK airline):

"Pilot assessment of TDZ RVR when practical always overrides the reported TDZ RVR or Met Visibility."

Hmmm. So it seems to be operator specific, as all these Part A references being quoted are approved by the regulator...

FW, but you can't replace reported RVR with pilot assessment if any of the RVRs are below take off minima.

For example, if you are given an RVR of 120m everything else is irrelevant. Even if you have a 90m visual segment you can't take off.

If you are given a TDZ RVR of 140, ie less than 150m, you can't start the take off run on a displaced threshold because that RVR isn't relevant to that part of the runway. You need to start the take off run at the relevant point, TDZ, which happens to mean that you'll see 15m centerline lights.

We can. And do, certainly in the sim. In real life the airport generally grinds to a stop with that kind of vis.

If I was given RVRs of 50/75/50 at LGW, from A/A3 (the 15m spacing is a separate discussion) and I assessed the TDZ visibility as 75m or more, I could take off, according to our manual. What other operators do, I don't know but I've done this with the CAA in the back with no complaint...

FW, yes I meant if any of the other RVRs are below take off minima, mid point and stop end. Even if you assess the initial take off run as adequate you can't go.

If it's any use to know the required runway centreline lights intensity is 5,000 candela whereas approach lighting is 20,000, so with 30m spaced approach lights pre-landing threshold without the runway centreline lights there's maybe just as much chance of having the required visual reference for take-off with the higher intensity approach lights.

Gatwick 26L has a starter extension between Mike and Alpha so no runway centreline lights in this portion required (not sure why), also not sure at 08R end if Juliet to runway landing threshold has runway centreline lights, but if not maybe there should be as it's a full width runway between these two points.

Manchester's runway 05L/23R is about to have 15m spaced centreline lights (for take-off) installed pre-landing threshold at either end. This is in addition to the 30m spaced approach lights already there.

The only Three RVR's ever reported are TDZ MID and RO
In any case the TDZ rvr becomes ir-relevent as soon as you choose to do and intersection departure.I have so far not come acrross any field where the LVP published gives line up at a point for which RVR is not available .So in any case be it VIDP or any place the line up (Now I THink so) will always happen at a position near the TDZ, as per published LVP procedure.

It certainly gets me to another Question - Are all taxi tracks and routes available during LVP.

As we lose count of the number of lights various we may or may not see at 60kts or otherwise, I recall in a UK company with a UK TRE operating UK CAA approved procedures, we were told that a rated thrust takeoff may be considered better in LVPs as you would have more distance to stop in crap vis and the V1 would be lower.

It also provided greater swing tendency in the event of the inevitable RTO or EFATO, so testing our ability to stay on the runway or get airborne safely with this extra handling difficulty.

Has this advice been blown out of UK tests and would the lights counters like to ponder the wisdom or otherwise of such training?

Just a thought to sway the topic away from your OM versus my OM!! :suspect:

P S. Obviously the wise pilot wants as much runway in front of them in conditions such as these.........................................