Worldliner From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 275 posts, RR: 0 Posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2128 times:
last night i came back from malaga on monarch. i landed at manchester and its the first time that i have landed at night, and the runway lights were not on. i was very surprised of this, and it seemed to have folled the pilot who landed halfway down the runway, and had to brake pretty seriously and with full reverse thrust on. the aircraft was a a321 and as you know, not the quietest aircraft when reserve thrusting.
i was surprised however that although the runway lights were not on the taxiway lights were. so the wasnt a powercut or anything like that, they just decided not to put them on.
i was wondering if anyone else had experienced this, as i though it was a hazard and possibly against rules.
Theginge From United Kingdom, joined Oct 2006, 1110 posts, RR: 0 Reply 1, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2111 times:
I think the landing lights would have been on, some runways have different lights to others. You should try going to places in the CIS and Middle east at night. A lot of them don;t have centre line lights so it is like landing in a black hole!!
I don't think a pilot would have been fooled by lack of lighting, that wouldn't have been a factor in landing where you think he did. And how do you know he was halfway down the runway from the cabin?
Worldliner From United Kingdom, joined Aug 2005, 275 posts, RR: 0 Reply 2, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 2093 times:
because i know manchester ringway like the back of my hand, he touched down at the end of terminal 3 which is about half way down the runway. the plane was heavy aswell, which is why i was surprised at the speed of the descent and landing.
If it was the first time you experienced a night landing, then what do you have to compare, or base your observations on? In my experience, unless you are staring straight down the runway (in other words, seeing from the pilots perspective) runway lights aren't always that noticeable because they are somewhat widely spread out down the runway. Taxi lights are often spaced closer together making them easy to spot from all angles.
ALL views, opinions expressed are mine ONLY and are NOT representative of those shared by Southwest Airlines Co.
PWM2TXLHopper From United States of America, joined Jan 2004, 1217 posts, RR: 1 Reply 10, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 5 days 2 hours ago) and read 1293 times:
Quoting Worldliner (Thread starter): the aircraft was a a321 and as you know, not the quietest aircraft when reserve thrusting.
I've never heard of "reserve" thrust? What's that? Is that for short field performance? I have heard of reverse thrust though, and that's not that loud on the A320 series if you compare it to aircraft a generation or two earlier.... So maybe that's not what you meant? Just wait until your first night landing when the control tower is on fire! That happens even a little more frequently than when you land with no runway lights at night! Sometime the pilots even use the glare from the blaze to land safely when, coincidentally, the runway lights are also out.
ScottieDog From United Kingdom, joined Nov 2004, 179 posts, RR: 0 Reply 12, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 18 hours ago) and read 1132 times:
Quoting Worldliner (Reply 2): because i know manchester ringway like the back of my hand, he touched down at the end of terminal 3 which is about half way down the runway. the plane was heavy aswell, which is why i was surprised at the speed of the descent and landing.
It would appear that you do not know Manchester as well as you claim. Look at any chart and you will see that Terminal 3 goes no further west than the end of Pier A ( the old domestic pier) - this is between links G & F. Now look at where the majority of flights touch down - I'm assuming that you were landing on 23R - and you will see that this is normally around Link G. Okay your flight might have had a slight 'float' as it flared and then the infamous 23 'hump' could have had an effect, but your stating that you were 1/2 way down the runway is incorrect.
If I remember correctly the runway edge flights may be slightly recessed and directional - ie you can not see them from the side. As has already been said, there is no way that any pilot would land on an unlit runway. If the lighting had failed at any stage of the approach then the standard procedure would have been to 'go around' until the problem was fixed.
Cross757 From United States of America, joined Jun 2007, 143 posts, RR: 0 Reply 13, posted (5 years 8 months 3 weeks 4 days 17 hours ago) and read 1040 times:
I believe some runway light designs are such that they can only be viewed from "head on", and not so much from the side. Where a taxiway intersects with the runway, the edge lights are either non-existant or they are of the "flush" design, like centerline or touch-down zone lighting, which might account for why it seemed that the lights were off. But then, I was not there, so this is just a guess on my part...you know that airport better than I do. Out of curiosity, where were you sitting in the aircraft: in front of the wing? Behind it? Hopefully you will get the chance to witness a night landing from the flight deck some time...it's quite a treat.
In my opinion, I don't think the pilot of a commercial aircraft would intentionally make a night landing with non-operational runway lights, unless under abnormal circumstances, such as an emergency.