These things are continuing with some frequency (cue classic arguments that it's statistically dang near nothing vs. the counter argument that someday we might a much less cool on-runway collision than the one we recently saw)
"Always" use a magenta line is, of course a good one...Of course, I get it that sometimes we cannot always count on a localizer or GPS or whatever.
However, after much meditation- why are we not_using approach lights and Runway End Identifier lights...here's what my B-Sxpertise is saying.
Ok, I am sure we ARE using these things, but maybe it gets elevated to a Evan/3BS fundamental thing that you "always" do instead of whatever it is that we do now.
Anything you land on must have an "special" light turned on (like approach lights in particular). (This would discriminate runways from taxiways).
And for confusing layouts with parallel runways (Late night landings on Inner runways at ATL or DFW or ETC- the "normal landing" runway has approach lights, the "normal takeoff runway" has official FAA "Runway End Identifier Lights". Same deal with the recent deal with the closed/blacked out runway- could it not have had approach lights OR REIL's to confirm where to land?
Landing crews must brief for what they will see on the way in: A runway with approach lights, OR a runway with REILs- and that maybe they verbally confirm that the light show = what it is supposed to be.
Would this be perfect? Probably not.
Would this "greatly reduce" our occasional wrong-runway-visual-landing incidents?
Quote = Flyboy, after he reads this post:
Your suggestion is duly noted.
[/quote)
Yes, no, maybe?
