Landing Light SOP

Before I had a car with automatic daytime running lights (05 Corolla), I
routinely turned on my headlights during the day. DRLs are mandatory in
Canada and many other countries. Motorcyclists keep their headlights on
during the day to enhance visibility. The "camouflage" theory is faulty.

Bob Gardner

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
"c. The FAA has a voluntary pilot safety program, Operation Lights On, to
enhance the see-and-avoid concept.

SNIP

Thanks, Bob.

I wonder, though -- do landing lights in the daytime really do that
much for you? I seem to recall reading that bright lights coming at
you during daylight hours actually tends to camouflage what is behind
them.

(Groping back into the distant recesses of my history minor here...)
Didn't the British actually experiment with using extremely bright
lights to hide their aircraft during the day?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"

In article ,
"Bob Gardner" wrote:

Before I had a car with automatic daytime running lights (05 Corolla), I
routinely turned on my headlights during the day. DRLs are mandatory in
Canada and many other countries. Motorcyclists keep their headlights on
during the day to enhance visibility. The "camouflage" theory is faulty.

except when *everyone* is using lights. :-(

--
Bob Noel
no one likes an educated mule

"Bob Gardner" wrote in news:xPKdnc7ST_orV_7eRVn-
:

Before I had a car with automatic daytime running lights (05 Corolla), I
routinely turned on my headlights during the day. DRLs are mandatory in
Canada and many other countries. Motorcyclists keep their headlights on
during the day to enhance visibility. The "camouflage" theory is faulty.

Bob Gardner
Snipola

I can speak from experience that no matter how bright the lights
are on a motorcycle (day OR night), most people just don't see them.
Observation is object based and most drivers are looking for cars,
not bikes. You tend not to see what you aren't looking for.

But the camouflage theory is based on what the background is. If the
background is a brightly lit blue sky, then lights can be used to
camouflage an object on a hill (or an aircraft) becasue the lights
are reducing hte contrast between the bright sky and the silhouette
of the object against the background. I've seen this demonstrated
on one of them discovery-like channels.

Brian
--
http://www.skywise711.com - Lasers, Seismology, Astronomy, Skepticism
Seismic FAQ: http://www.skywise711.com/SeismicFAQ/SeismicFAQ.html
Quake "predictions": http://www.skywise711.com/quakes/EQDB/index.html
Sed quis custodiet ipsos Custodes?
Supernews sucks - blocking google, usenet.com & newsfeeds.com posts

On Sat, 29 Oct 2005 12:17:09 -0700, "Bob Gardner"
wrote:

Before I had a car with automatic daytime running lights (05 Corolla), I
routinely turned on my headlights during the day. DRLs are mandatory in
Canada and many other countries. Motorcyclists keep their headlights on
during the day to enhance visibility. The "camouflage" theory is faulty.

I've observed lights camouflaging an oncoming car. It was in Florida.
The Canadian cars with headlights on virtually disappeared under the
bright Florida sun while the cars without headlights on were clearly
visible. Most of the countries that require DRLs are northern
latitudes where the winter days can be quite dim or even dark all the
time. In those places, I think that DRLs probably help. Maybe the U.S.
too, in winter.

I remember seeing a TV documentary about camouflage that detailed the
U.S. Army's experiments with camouflaging a tank by lighting it up.
The film demonstrated that it actually works under the right
conditions.

I think the landing light should be used when it will actually help.
On a bright CAVU day it probably won't help much. During rain, low
clouds, or haze, I've seen landing lights make an aircraft much more
visible. On a hazy day, I've had the tower call my aircraft to another
pilot and I'd hear only "looking" as a response. Then I snapped on my
landing light and immediately heard the other pilot report visual
contact. It does work.

The rest of the time, I leave the landing light off. The damn thing
burns out so frequently that running it when I don't need it only
wastes bulb life. Then it won't be there when I really do need it.

RK Henry

Before I had a car with automatic daytime running lights (05 Corolla), I
routinely turned on my headlights during the day. DRLs are mandatory in
Canada and many other countries. Motorcyclists keep their headlights on
during the day to enhance visibility. The "camouflage" theory is faulty.

Apples and oranges. On the ground, a landing light (or headlights)
will probably enhance visibility, even in the daytime. (Although, as
other posters have noted, not all the time.)

In the air, though, it's not so cut and dried. I found this on a
military history website:
************************************************** ******************
The post-war period saw interest in naval visual stealth and camouflage
declined further, although one USN initiative is worth analysis.
Codenamed 'Project Yehudi', this 1940's programme adapted contrast
lighting techniques experimented with during the First World War. By
attaching bright light sources to the outside of RN corvettes and the
Royal Canadian Navy vessel HMCS Trillium, First World War-period
technicians had sought to eliminate silhouetting effects.

The technique worked best during periods of haze, but changeable
weather meant that it was only effective for seconds at a time and was
negated by movement of the vessels. 'Project Yehudi' revived this
'active camouflage' principle by modifying TBM-3 Avenger and B-24
Liberator anti-submarine patrol and attack aircraft with similar
lighting schemes.
************************************************** ******************

So, I guess it all comes down to this: Are the benefits derived from
flying around with your landing light(s) on greater than the problems
encountered when you try to land at night with burnt-out landing light
bulbs?

:-)

(Must be why Lopresti can sell those danged Boom Beams for a grand!)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

To go back to the beginning of the thread then, Jay, why do the airlines
bother?

Bob

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
oups.com...
Before I had a car with automatic daytime running lights (05 Corolla), I
routinely turned on my headlights during the day. DRLs are mandatory in
Canada and many other countries. Motorcyclists keep their headlights on
during the day to enhance visibility. The "camouflage" theory is faulty.

Apples and oranges. On the ground, a landing light (or headlights)
will probably enhance visibility, even in the daytime. (Although, as
other posters have noted, not all the time.)

In the air, though, it's not so cut and dried. I found this on a
military history website:
************************************************** ******************
The post-war period saw interest in naval visual stealth and camouflage
declined further, although one USN initiative is worth analysis.
Codenamed 'Project Yehudi', this 1940's programme adapted contrast
lighting techniques experimented with during the First World War. By
attaching bright light sources to the outside of RN corvettes and the
Royal Canadian Navy vessel HMCS Trillium, First World War-period
technicians had sought to eliminate silhouetting effects.

The technique worked best during periods of haze, but changeable
weather meant that it was only effective for seconds at a time and was
negated by movement of the vessels. 'Project Yehudi' revived this
'active camouflage' principle by modifying TBM-3 Avenger and B-24
Liberator anti-submarine patrol and attack aircraft with similar
lighting schemes.
************************************************** ******************

So, I guess it all comes down to this: Are the benefits derived from
flying around with your landing light(s) on greater than the problems
encountered when you try to land at night with burnt-out landing light
bulbs?

:-)

(Must be why Lopresti can sell those danged Boom Beams for a grand!)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

To go back to the beginning of the thread then, Jay, why do the airlines
bother?

Help me here -- I can't find any reference in this thread to airlines
using their landing lights en route.

While landing and taking off, yes -- but I thought we were discussing
whether landing lights actually enhanced visibility outside of the
airport environment?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Help me here -- I can't find any reference in this thread to airlines
using their landing lights en route.

When most of us are enroute, we are where the airlines are landing or
taking off.

Jose
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

Help me here. Where in my post do you find the word "enroute"?

Bob

"Jay Honeck" wrote in message
ups.com...
To go back to the beginning of the thread then, Jay, why do the airlines
bother?

Help me here -- I can't find any reference in this thread to airlines
using their landing lights en route.

While landing and taking off, yes -- but I thought we were discussing
whether landing lights actually enhanced visibility outside of the
airport environment?
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"

Help me here. Where in my post do you find the word "enroute"?

Well, if we're talking about using landing lights while *landing*, I guess
we're in agreement!

;-)
--
Jay Honeck
Iowa City, IA
Pathfinder N56993
www.AlexisParkInn.com
"Your Aviation Destination"