Actual Logo Light Usage?

[StevenHPerry 20]

I made a late (read: "delayed") connection through ORD on the 30th/31st and, while waiting in the queue for departure noticed that none of the dozens of planes that were taxiing had their tails illuminated!? No one at the gates had the logo illuminated either. I only saw one aircraft with the tail lit up, and it was an Asiana Cargo 747. It was night VMC with a light rain from a 5000'+ overcast, and maybe what would qualify as a mist but visibility was still >10SM. Can anyone fill me in on why none of the domestic carriers were using the logo lights? Perhaps everyone was ashamed of their on-time performance that night (I was delayed 5 hours)?Steve Perry

[Guest ahmedem]

I would guess that since ORD is a pretty well lit airport none of the pilots felt it necessary to use the logo lights since it was easy to distinguish the airline from the ambient light.If that was a darker airport then maybe you would have seen more lit up. It is a little like car headlights since AFAIK its at pilot's discretion whether to use them or not.That's my guess.

[Orlaam 306]

I think it's more of a preference for most carriers. I don't see to many at KPHX when I'm watching from college (right across the street) either. I don't think it has anything to do with safety either. They probably save money on bulbs and maintenance by leaving them off :-lol

[Guest Daniel Pimentel]

Well, AA usually lets the tail lights burn out, so you'll rarely see those on.DPhttp://www.precisionmanuals.com/images/forum/ng_driver.jpgMember of SJU Photography. [A HREF=http://www.jetphotos.net/showphotos.php?userid=9004]Click Here[/A] to view my aircraft photos at JetPhotos.Net!The official psychotic AA painter. :)