Beacons/anticollision lights and engines

Peter Duniho wrote:
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message
...
[...] I'm not even required to have any anti-collision
lights

Why not?

Ooops, you're right. While not originally required for night
certification, The plane needs them after 1971. However several
times since 1971 the requirements for anticollision lights has
been expanded.

RK Henry writes:

1. In FARs part 1.1, Definitions, "Operate" is defined:

"Operate, with respect to aircraft, means use, cause to use or
authorize to use aircraft, for the purpose (except as provided in
§91.13 of this chapter) of air navigation including the piloting of
aircraft, with or without the right of legal control (as owner,
lessee, or otherwise)."

I don't see the word "engine" anywhere in the quoted text--again.

It's best to read what regulations say, and not try to guess what
you'd like them to mean. Legal documents are generally explicit;
imagination is neither required nor recommended.

If you're planning on using the airplane for flying, I'd interpret
that as beginning with the moment you turn the key 'til the airplane
is back in the hangar.

So it's your interpretation; it's not written in the regulations.

Running the anti-collision system is low-cost insurance. Except for
cases like not operating strobes around people, it's better to just go
ahead and use it. It could save someone's life.

I never expressed any objection to it.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

"Jim Macklin" writes:

Who really knows. Did you ever see that movie about the guy
who scammed the airlines and a bunch of college girls?

True story.

_Catch Me If You Can_ (2002), starring Leonardo DiCaprio, Tom Hanks,
Martin Sheen, Christopher Walken, Natalie Baye.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

Jim Macklin wrote:
Who really knows. Did you ever see that movie about the guy
who scammed the airlines and a bunch of college girls?

True story.

Which movie is that?

Emily writes:

Which movie is that?

_Catch Me If You Can_, from 2002.

I think Tony Curtis was in another, similar movie, but it wasn't about
the same person.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

B A R R Y wrote:
On 14 Oct 2006 06:18:01 -0700, "Kingfish"
wrote:

Hmmm. Do you turn on your virtual strobe before you start your virtual
engine, so as not to endanger anyone with your virtual prop?


I'm imagining a computer monitor with a big-ass Whelan tail strobe on
top... G

That thought gives me a headache.

Actually the FAA means , in the paragraph you cited, that
"operate" means use an airplane in a business or otherwise
have the control of the airplane. It does not mean that the
engine is running.


"RK Henry" wrote in message
...
| On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 20:52:59 +0200, Mxsmanic

| wrote:
|
| RK Henry writes:
|
| Yes it does. In the excerpt here, "Operate" means
running the engines.
|
| According to whom?
|
| 1. In FARs part 1.1, Definitions, "Operate" is defined:
|
| "Operate, with respect to aircraft, means use, cause to
use or
| authorize to use aircraft, for the purpose (except as
provided in
| §91.13 of this chapter) of air navigation including the
piloting of
| aircraft, with or without the right of legal control (as
owner,
| lessee, or otherwise)."
|
| If you're planning on using the airplane for flying, I'd
interpret
| that as beginning with the moment you turn the key 'til
the airplane
| is back in the hangar. I suppose it could exclude running
the engine
| at the shop, since that's not for the purpose of air
navigation, but
| the mechanics usually turn on the beacon too.
|
| 2. The mention in the AIM about lights isn't regulatory,
but it may as
| well be. It's good operating practice, and a pilot
ignoring good
| operating practice could conceivably be caught by the
catch-all
| regulation, FAR 91.13, Careless or reckless operation.
Especially if
| someone got hurt. And of course, none of us wants anyone
to get hurt.
|
| Running the anti-collision system is low-cost insurance.
Except for
| cases like not operating strobes around people, it's
better to just go
| ahead and use it. It could save someone's life.
|
| RK Henry

Catch Me If You Can, I think...Tom Hanks and DeCapprio. I
saw the real guy on the Tonight show. He made phony ID
using decals from a model and then recruited college girls
to travel with him so he would not "stand out" while he dead
headed all over the world.

I wonder if he could still do that with the new security and
background checks?


"Emily" wrote in message
...
| Jim Macklin wrote:
| Who really knows. Did you ever see that movie about the
guy
| who scammed the airlines and a bunch of college girls?
|
| True story.
|
| Which movie is that?

Frasca made a sim/training device back in the mid 1960
period. Mounted on the chair was a boxing glove that would
hit you in the back of the head if you exceeded the
parameters. Sounds like a negative reinforcement.



"Emily" wrote in message
...
|B A R R Y wrote:
| On 14 Oct 2006 06:18:01 -0700, "Kingfish"

| wrote:
|
| Hmmm. Do you turn on your virtual strobe before you
start your virtual
| engine, so as not to endanger anyone with your virtual
prop?
|
|
| I'm imagining a computer monitor with a big-ass Whelan
tail strobe on
| top... G
|
| That thought gives me a headache.

Jim Macklin wrote:
Catch Me If You Can, I think...Tom Hanks and DeCapprio. I
saw the real guy on the Tonight show. He made phony ID
using decals from a model and then recruited college girls
to travel with him so he would not "stand out" while he dead
headed all over the world.

I wonder if he could still do that with the new security and
background checks?

I did see that but wasn't sure you were talking about the same movie. I
highly doubt he could do that today. It's hard enough to get on a
commercial flight when you're legally authorized to be on it.