>"shed some light" on this question?  Are night carrier ops as
>dark and dank as they used to be?  Are there other colors that
>illuminate as well as or better than red without damaging night vision?
>
>For my own part, I've very rarely ever used landing or taxi
>lights but have realized that it's necessary in GA if only to
>chase the deer and geese off the runway, and be seen by my
>brethren.  I've always stuck to the old standard red
 
Jim,

Night carrier ops were still very dark off So-Cal.  Always foggy so even
the full moon disappeared as you entered to goo.  The Hornet, although
marvelously engineered, had a lovely 16 rheostats for green lighting
variation.  The newer models had 17 to reduce the too bright engine/
fuel panel. Perhaps the E/F Hornets got all this straightened out. The
green worked well with NVG's and the displays.  

I use the blue post lights (I know, I know, ultra cheap guy here) in my
360.  They're really nice and with a Bob Knuckolls rheostat provide
excellent adjustability.  Blue over red?  I like it, but I've been
flying behind green for years.  If you liked red stick with it.

The bigger argument is weather it's worth $100 per gauge to back light.
Or nu-lite.  I've flown about 20 of my 314 hours in the dark. No matter
what system I were to chose, I'd still have a handheld at the ready.

I do agree that in the world of GA some sort of landing/ taxi lights are
a good idea.  Here in TX, I've chased cattle off my runway but no deer
(daytime however).

Larry Henney
N360LH