Narrative:

Don't know if it was controller's deficiency, insufficient staffing, overwhelming traffic, or a combination of all three, but the situation in louisville was out of hand. As we flew over the airport at 6000 ft MSL for vectors to runway 1 (having come from cvg) we heard the controller asking another pilot if he had the field in sight at 8 NM on his nose. We looked down and saw all the runway and approach lights for runways 35 and 1 were off. We asked for them to be turned up. Then abeam the OM for runway 1 heading 200 degrees, he asked if we had runway in sight (6 mi directly behind airplane). Asked for a vector to final and were given a 160 degree turn and cleared for an NDB runway 1 approach -- luckily it was VFR. Complicating things was the lack of operating navaids to runways. By NOTAM runway 1 localizer was OTS. On ATIS runway 35 localizer was OTS. Also runways 1 and 29 GS were OTS. There were no PAPI or VASI. Upon subsequent takeoff from sdf overheard another air carrier pilot tell same controller he had tried to call him 4 or 5 times to verify an assigned heading. It needs to be determined: why controling was so bad, why facility is allowed to operate without navaids, and why runway lights were not on at night. It's bad enough fighting your own body at night without having so much departure from SOP's. Callback conversation with reporter revealed the following information: reporter conceded that the controller may have been under the gun with a heavy workload that was further complicated with so many navaids OTS. None of the runway lights were on.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: AN ACR CAPT RPTS THAT THE SDF APCH CTLR WAS VECTORING ACFT FOR VISUAL APCHS, BUT THAT PLTS WERE NOT ABLE TO SEE THE ARPT BECAUSE THE RWY LIGHTS WERE NOT TURNED ON. THEN, WHEN THE RPTR COULD NOT RPT THE ARPT IN SIGHT (ARPT WAS AT THE ACFT'S 6 O'CLOCK POS), THE RPTR RECEIVED AN NDB APCH. RPTR ALSO CITES THAT NOTAMS DID NOT ACTUALLY REFLECT THE ARPT'S OPERATIONAL STATUS.

Narrative: DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS CTLR'S DEFICIENCY, INSUFFICIENT STAFFING, OVERWHELMING TFC, OR A COMBINATION OF ALL THREE, BUT THE SIT IN LOUISVILLE WAS OUT OF HAND. AS WE FLEW OVER THE ARPT AT 6000 FT MSL FOR VECTORS TO RWY 1 (HAVING COME FROM CVG) WE HEARD THE CTLR ASKING ANOTHER PLT IF HE HAD THE FIELD IN SIGHT AT 8 NM ON HIS NOSE. WE LOOKED DOWN AND SAW ALL THE RWY AND APCH LIGHTS FOR RWYS 35 AND 1 WERE OFF. WE ASKED FOR THEM TO BE TURNED UP. THEN ABEAM THE OM FOR RWY 1 HDG 200 DEGS, HE ASKED IF WE HAD RWY IN SIGHT (6 MI DIRECTLY BEHIND AIRPLANE). ASKED FOR A VECTOR TO FINAL AND WERE GIVEN A 160 DEG TURN AND CLRED FOR AN NDB RWY 1 APCH -- LUCKILY IT WAS VFR. COMPLICATING THINGS WAS THE LACK OF OPERATING NAVAIDS TO RWYS. BY NOTAM RWY 1 LOC WAS OTS. ON ATIS RWY 35 LOC WAS OTS. ALSO RWYS 1 AND 29 GS WERE OTS. THERE WERE NO PAPI OR VASI. UPON SUBSEQUENT TKOF FROM SDF OVERHEARD ANOTHER ACR PLT TELL SAME CTLR HE HAD TRIED TO CALL HIM 4 OR 5 TIMES TO VERIFY AN ASSIGNED HDG. IT NEEDS TO BE DETERMINED: WHY CTLING WAS SO BAD, WHY FACILITY IS ALLOWED TO OPERATE WITHOUT NAVAIDS, AND WHY RWY LIGHTS WERE NOT ON AT NIGHT. IT'S BAD ENOUGH FIGHTING YOUR OWN BODY AT NIGHT WITHOUT HAVING SO MUCH DEP FROM SOP'S. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR CONCEDED THAT THE CTLR MAY HAVE BEEN UNDER THE GUN WITH A HVY WORKLOAD THAT WAS FURTHER COMPLICATED WITH SO MANY NAVAIDS OTS. NONE OF THE RWY LIGHTS WERE ON.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of July 2007 and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.