Landing on Unlit Runway at Night
- Thread starter braunpilot
- Start date
To be fair, it wouldn't be a "wreckless" party...
He'll be here all week ladies and gentlemen!!!
Autothrust Blue
Welcome aboard the Washington State Ferries
Actually, I do have to go to work on Thursday, and have a funeral on Saturday, so I'll not be here all week...just most of it.
braunpilot
What day is it?
I know, I just don't know about their GOM/Op Specs. They are part 135 VFR for traffic watch. Besides I couldn't find any rule that would require a yes or no.
Thanks for the info.
majleeginfidel
Well-Known Member
hey whats up guys/gals, ive got a quick question for you referring to landing on an unlit runway. First off im an Air Force air traffic controller but i cant find this in any of our regs.... So im asking you guys whats happened to you.
During a debate, which we do often, we started debating why we should or should not state "runway, wind, at your own risk" vs "runway, wind, cleared to land" when there is a change in the RWY lighting.
Seeing that you guys land on unlit runways, what do the controllers issue to you when you land?
We keep the edge lights on, distance remaining on, threshold on... but the aircraft "REQUEST" the approach, strobes, and papi's to be turned off for NVG training, now people here seem to think that this is "abnormal" and you can not issue a landing clearance, though this is a nightly occurance and there is a LOP on it, cant remember the specifics. Now everyone seems to think that someone in a reg it states that i can no clear you to land on an unlit runway, or a runway with any abnormal lighting configurations for said airport. I came from a base where we cleared everyone to land, whether the lights are full up or all the way pitch black.
Anyways, thats the jest of it, just looking for what you guys are told when landing unlit runways. Thanks and safe flight!
During a debate, which we do often, we started debating why we should or should not state "runway, wind, at your own risk" vs "runway, wind, cleared to land" when there is a change in the RWY lighting.
Seeing that you guys land on unlit runways, what do the controllers issue to you when you land?
We keep the edge lights on, distance remaining on, threshold on... but the aircraft "REQUEST" the approach, strobes, and papi's to be turned off for NVG training, now people here seem to think that this is "abnormal" and you can not issue a landing clearance, though this is a nightly occurance and there is a LOP on it, cant remember the specifics. Now everyone seems to think that someone in a reg it states that i can no clear you to land on an unlit runway, or a runway with any abnormal lighting configurations for said airport. I came from a base where we cleared everyone to land, whether the lights are full up or all the way pitch black.
Anyways, thats the jest of it, just looking for what you guys are told when landing unlit runways. Thanks and safe flight!
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
Under NVGs it is quite common to ask tower to turn off the lights.
Ive never heard of "own risk" vs "cleared to land" for an unlit runway. Only usually hear it for aircraft landing within tower's airspace, but in an area tower can't see visually. Then is when the "own risk" advisory is normally broadcast, from my experience.
Same here.
trafficinsight
Well-Known Member
I've gotten it before when landing on an unlit runway at night. I requested it to see what it was like in case I ever had to do it for real. They were happy to give it to me but added the "at your own risk" at the end of it.
Sent from 1865 by telegraph....
That does make sense, if it's not normal ops for that field and due to your request.
TFaudree_ERAU
Mashin' dem buttons
hahahaWhat you do with your privates isn't appropriate discussion for this forum.
You never drill your privates?
braunpilot
What day is it?
As far as I'm concerned, this runway is lit. There is nothing that states that the approach lights can't be NOTAM'd out. As long as the runway is defined then I think the runway is lit. Just my $0.02.
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
There is a precedent for taking off from a runway being reckless and careless- the catch all. Remember, the FARs do not prohibit every possible unsafe act and while there may be very good reasons for landing on an unlit runway (NVG operations), I would be careful about just randomly doing so. If the lights are not working I would ensure there is not a NOTAM and, unless there is a critical reason, I would probably go elsewhere.
Granted, there is another issue in this case (not producing his logbook), but the NTSB judge does state that taking off from an unlit runway is careless and reckless.
http://www.ntsb.gov/legal/o_n_o/docs/Aviation/5580.pdf
"The law judge found the evidence clearly established that if respondent had clicked the correct frequency, the runway lights would have illuminated. He concluded respondent’s deliberate decision to take off in the dark, without having completed a proper preflight with respect to the facilities, endangered the life and property of others, including the life of respondent’s wife, and was a reckless operation of the aircraft."
Granted, there is another issue in this case (not producing his logbook), but the NTSB judge does state that taking off from an unlit runway is careless and reckless.
http://www.ntsb.gov/legal/o_n_o/docs/Aviation/5580.pdf
"The law judge found the evidence clearly established that if respondent had clicked the correct frequency, the runway lights would have illuminated. He concluded respondent’s deliberate decision to take off in the dark, without having completed a proper preflight with respect to the facilities, endangered the life and property of others, including the life of respondent’s wife, and was a reckless operation of the aircraft."
z987k
Well-Known Member
I think that had more to do with the guy being a complete moron. You can safely takeoff and land from an unlit airport without nvg's.
Blackhawk
Well-Known Member
Read my last paragraph. While the guy is a complete moron, unfortunately morons often set legal precedents. The judge makes it very, very clear that he considers the decision to take off of a dark runway "...a reckless operation of the airplane.". It does not matter WHAT you think is safe. This is now the law. Want this precedent overturned? You can either write the Office of Chief Counsel for an interpretation or violate this interpretation and and go through the legal process and hope it is overturned. I recommend against the latter.
My command primarily operates out of NAS Pax River when on alert. The field is not 24 hours, as it is a training/test facility for the Navy.
Given that we may have to fly at any hour of the day, we are routinely given a land or takeoff clearance "at own risk" as the controllers that stand watch after hours for us are not fully qualified to man an ATC facility. Basically all they are trained to do is pull a clearance for us and turn on the lights.
This is actually all we get at NAS Pax... That place is a black hole.
Given that we may have to fly at any hour of the day, we are routinely given a land or takeoff clearance "at own risk" as the controllers that stand watch after hours for us are not fully qualified to man an ATC facility. Basically all they are trained to do is pull a clearance for us and turn on the lights.
This is actually all we get at NAS Pax... That place is a black hole.