Narrative:

The RNAV (GPS) runway 20 approach into saf is not authorized at night. There is no approach control service. When the most suitable runway is 20; albuquerque center asks if an arriving crew has the field in sight and will issue a clearance for a night visual approach to runway 20. The reason this [RNAV GPS] approach is not authorized at night is that there are unlit obstacles that penetrate the 20:1 ois for the visual segment of the GPS approach as contained in terps 251. I have forwarded a copy of the 8260-4 form to the manager that describes this approach and which identifies the obstacles. What is confusing to pilots is the ILS runway 2 has circling minimums that are not restricted at night. It appears that a pilot could execute the ILS runway 2 approach and circle to land on runway 20. However; that doesn't mitigate the fact that there are unlit obstacles that penetrate the 20:1 visual segment surface. This surface is specified in 14 crash fire rescue equipment part 77. It is also interesting to note that a 3-degree glide path is about 19.1:1; so the 20:1 surface is essentially the same. This means that there are unlit obstacles that infringe on the 3-degree glide path to runway 20. The penetrating unlit obstacles are mitigated by limiting the approach visibility to not less than 1 mile and not authorizing the approach at night. During the day a pilot; with the 1 mile visibility; should be able to see the offending obstacles. But at night no amount of visibility will allow a pilot to see an unlit point obstacle. This issue has been under discussion at the air charting forum. While I may be jumping to a conclusion without collecting and understanding all the facts I felt it was important to bring up this concern as soon as possible. Based on the information I have so far it may be unsafe to be operating to saf runway 20 at night; to include visual approaches to runway 20. This issue has to do with; 'the fact that an IAP states that use of the straight-in minimums to a runway is not authorized at night while at the same time an IAP serving a different runway allows for circling to the very same runway at night introduces confusion for the pilot. This practice encourages pilots to conduct the much riskier circle-to-land approach at night in lieu of conducting a stabilized; straight-in approach. Night operations into certain runways into saf may need to be restricted until this issue is clarified and clearly understood by pilots.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: An air carrier Captain reports that a night approach to SAF Runway 20; including the Runway 2 circle to Runway 20; cannot be safely flown because an unlit obstacle extends into the Runway 20 TERPS protected area.

Narrative: The RNAV (GPS) Runway 20 approach into SAF is not authorized at night. There is no approach control service. When the most suitable runway is 20; Albuquerque Center asks if an arriving crew has the field in sight and will issue a clearance for a night visual approach to Runway 20. The reason this [RNAV GPS] approach is not authorized at night is that there are unlit obstacles that penetrate the 20:1 OIS for the visual segment of the GPS approach as contained in TERPS 251. I have forwarded a copy of the 8260-4 form to the manager that describes this approach and which identifies the obstacles. What is confusing to pilots is the ILS Runway 2 has circling minimums that are not restricted at night. It appears that a pilot could execute the ILS Runway 2 approach and circle to land on Runway 20. However; that doesn't mitigate the fact that there are unlit obstacles that penetrate the 20:1 visual segment surface. This surface is specified in 14 CFR Part 77. It is also interesting to note that a 3-degree glide path is about 19.1:1; so the 20:1 surface is essentially the same. This means that there are unlit obstacles that infringe on the 3-degree glide path to Runway 20. The penetrating unlit obstacles are mitigated by limiting the approach visibility to not less than 1 mile and not authorizing the approach at night. During the day a pilot; with the 1 mile visibility; should be able to see the offending obstacles. But at night no amount of visibility will allow a pilot to see an unlit point obstacle. This issue has been under discussion at the Air Charting Forum. While I may be jumping to a conclusion without collecting and understanding all the facts I felt it was important to bring up this concern as soon as possible. Based on the information I have so far it may be unsafe to be operating to SAF Runway 20 at night; to include visual approaches to Runway 20. This issue has to do with; 'the fact that an IAP states that use of the straight-in minimums to a runway is not authorized at night while at the same time an IAP serving a different runway allows for circling to the very same runway at night introduces confusion for the pilot. This practice encourages pilots to conduct the much riskier circle-to-land approach at night in lieu of conducting a stabilized; straight-in approach. Night operations into certain runways into SAF may need to be restricted until this issue is clarified and clearly understood by pilots.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site as of April 2012 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.