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.........................................