Narrative:

On mar/mon/06; I was the PF on approach into runway 7L. The visibility down to about 1 mi and the snow coming down fairly heavy. Because runway 7R was closed for snow removal; we were assigned the ILS runway 7L. I was flying and as the approach continued; the first officer (the pilot monitoring) indicated that he had (the) approach lights in sight. The threshold of runway 7L is probably almost 1 mi past the threshold of runway 7R. We were lined up on the localizer and on glide path for runway 7L and I was sure the lights seen by the pilot monitoring were the approach lights for runway 7R; and we continued to runway 7L. We landed without incident and taxied to the ramp. On the way to the hotel; we discussed the circumstances of that approach and we noted that it was always possible that due to the proximity of the runways; wind; visibility or other circumstances; it would be fairly easy to get sucked into landing on runway 7R when those lights come into view on a low visibility approach into runway 7L. I was surprised that the approach lights on runway 7R were illuminated and on fairly bright when the runway was closed; especially for snow removal. So; the next morning I called the anchorage international control tower to discuss the issue with the tower folks. The controller understood the implications of having those approach lights illuminated when the runway is closed; especially when closed for snow removal. Supervisor told me that their problem under those circumstances was that tower personnel were prohibited from turning the approach lights off below step #1; whenever the temperature is below freezing. The problem is that when the lights are turned off; they cool and if turned on at cold temperatures; they heat up too unevenly and the bulbs blow out and most of the bulbs must be replaced. Basically; the tower personnel are in an impossible situation. They can't turn the lights off because of the expense of bulb replacement; and yet they are aware of the problem that can result. So; this situation does provide the potential that an aircraft could potentially be misled; under the wrong circumstances; into landing on a runway where snow removal operations are in progress. I was told that the tower does have radar that allows the tower personnel to see when an aircraft goes off the approach path to an assigned runway. That does not reassure me that solution would absolutely prevent the potentially disastrous situation that could result from having those approach lights illuminated when the runway is closed. When I signed off with the supervisor; we agreed that the best immediate thing that could be accomplished would be that an advisory should be provided to aircraft approaching runway 7L when the runway 7R approach lights are on and operating. At least that is something. I don't remember; after 40 yrs of flying; ever seeing the approach lights for a closed runway; especially one where snow removal was in progress; being on when the parallel runway was as close as runway 7L and runway 7R are in anchorage. In any case; I believe that the ATC manual should contain a provision that 'requires' the controller to advise an approaching flight that approach lights may come into view of the approach; that are not associated with the landing runway. With ILS; it is easier to assure that you are landing on the correct runway. On a non precision approach; without the benefit of a localizer and glide path; an aircraft could be misled to switching over to runway 7R; resulting in an aircraft landing on a runway with snow removal in progress.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: B747 EXPRESSED CONCERN REGARDING ANC'S POLICY OF LEAVING RWY APCH LIGHTS ILLUMINATED ON CLOSED RWY DURING SLOW REMOVAL OPS.

Narrative: ON MAR/MON/06; I WAS THE PF ON APCH INTO RWY 7L. THE VISIBILITY DOWN TO ABOUT 1 MI AND THE SNOW COMING DOWN FAIRLY HVY. BECAUSE RWY 7R WAS CLOSED FOR SNOW REMOVAL; WE WERE ASSIGNED THE ILS RWY 7L. I WAS FLYING AND AS THE APCH CONTINUED; THE FO (THE PLT MONITORING) INDICATED THAT HE HAD (THE) APCH LIGHTS IN SIGHT. THE THRESHOLD OF RWY 7L IS PROBABLY ALMOST 1 MI PAST THE THRESHOLD OF RWY 7R. WE WERE LINED UP ON THE LOC AND ON GLIDE PATH FOR RWY 7L AND I WAS SURE THE LIGHTS SEEN BY THE PLT MONITORING WERE THE APCH LIGHTS FOR RWY 7R; AND WE CONTINUED TO RWY 7L. WE LANDED WITHOUT INCIDENT AND TAXIED TO THE RAMP. ON THE WAY TO THE HOTEL; WE DISCUSSED THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT APCH AND WE NOTED THAT IT WAS ALWAYS POSSIBLE THAT DUE TO THE PROX OF THE RWYS; WIND; VISIBILITY OR OTHER CIRCUMSTANCES; IT WOULD BE FAIRLY EASY TO GET SUCKED INTO LNDG ON RWY 7R WHEN THOSE LIGHTS COME INTO VIEW ON A LOW VISIBILITY APCH INTO RWY 7L. I WAS SURPRISED THAT THE APCH LIGHTS ON RWY 7R WERE ILLUMINATED AND ON FAIRLY BRIGHT WHEN THE RWY WAS CLOSED; ESPECIALLY FOR SNOW REMOVAL. SO; THE NEXT MORNING I CALLED THE ANCHORAGE INTL CTL TWR TO DISCUSS THE ISSUE WITH THE TWR FOLKS. THE CTLR UNDERSTOOD THE IMPLICATIONS OF HAVING THOSE APCH LIGHTS ILLUMINATED WHEN THE RWY IS CLOSED; ESPECIALLY WHEN CLOSED FOR SNOW REMOVAL. SUPVR TOLD ME THAT THEIR PROB UNDER THOSE CIRCUMSTANCES WAS THAT TWR PERSONNEL WERE PROHIBITED FROM TURNING THE APCH LIGHTS OFF BELOW STEP #1; WHENEVER THE TEMP IS BELOW FREEZING. THE PROB IS THAT WHEN THE LIGHTS ARE TURNED OFF; THEY COOL AND IF TURNED ON AT COLD TEMPS; THEY HEAT UP TOO UNEVENLY AND THE BULBS BLOW OUT AND MOST OF THE BULBS MUST BE REPLACED. BASICALLY; THE TWR PERSONNEL ARE IN AN IMPOSSIBLE SITUATION. THEY CAN'T TURN THE LIGHTS OFF BECAUSE OF THE EXPENSE OF BULB REPLACEMENT; AND YET THEY ARE AWARE OF THE PROB THAT CAN RESULT. SO; THIS SITUATION DOES PROVIDE THE POTENTIAL THAT AN ACFT COULD POTENTIALLY BE MISLED; UNDER THE WRONG CIRCUMSTANCES; INTO LNDG ON A RWY WHERE SNOW REMOVAL OPS ARE IN PROGRESS. I WAS TOLD THAT THE TWR DOES HAVE RADAR THAT ALLOWS THE TWR PERSONNEL TO SEE WHEN AN ACFT GOES OFF THE APCH PATH TO AN ASSIGNED RWY. THAT DOES NOT REASSURE ME THAT SOLUTION WOULD ABSOLUTELY PREVENT THE POTENTIALLY DISASTROUS SITUATION THAT COULD RESULT FROM HAVING THOSE APCH LIGHTS ILLUMINATED WHEN THE RWY IS CLOSED. WHEN I SIGNED OFF WITH THE SUPVR; WE AGREED THAT THE BEST IMMEDIATE THING THAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED WOULD BE THAT AN ADVISORY SHOULD BE PROVIDED TO ACFT APCHING RWY 7L WHEN THE RWY 7R APCH LIGHTS ARE ON AND OPERATING. AT LEAST THAT IS SOMETHING. I DON'T REMEMBER; AFTER 40 YRS OF FLYING; EVER SEEING THE APCH LIGHTS FOR A CLOSED RWY; ESPECIALLY ONE WHERE SNOW REMOVAL WAS IN PROGRESS; BEING ON WHEN THE PARALLEL RWY WAS AS CLOSE AS RWY 7L AND RWY 7R ARE IN ANCHORAGE. IN ANY CASE; I BELIEVE THAT THE ATC MANUAL SHOULD CONTAIN A PROVISION THAT 'REQUIRES' THE CTLR TO ADVISE AN APCHING FLT THAT APCH LIGHTS MAY COME INTO VIEW OF THE APCH; THAT ARE NOT ASSOCIATED WITH THE LNDG RWY. WITH ILS; IT IS EASIER TO ASSURE THAT YOU ARE LNDG ON THE CORRECT RWY. ON A NON PRECISION APCH; WITHOUT THE BENEFIT OF A LOC AND GLIDE PATH; AN ACFT COULD BE MISLED TO SWITCHING OVER TO RWY 7R; RESULTING IN AN ACFT LNDG ON A RWY WITH SNOW REMOVAL IN PROGRESS.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of January 2009 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.