Requirement for runway lights for IFR takeoff

[Ibra]

Hello,

Not a Mooney question,

Anyone know if there are rules for IFR takeoff at night at untowred airfields without ATC? anything in Part91, FAR, AIM, TERPS that mandate or require runway lights (or taxiway, airport becon, obstacles...) for takeoff under IFR 

What about departures at night VFR from untowred airfields in US?

Asking for myself, I have to reply to an inquiry regarding night departure while ago from untowred airfield following the standard departure (sort of SID), the airport has omnidirectional departures (sort of ODP)...

Edited January 11 by Ibra

[Nico1]

From a quick google search it is not allowed under part 121 (https://www.faa.gov/sites/faa.gov/files/other_visit/aviation_industry/airline_operators/airline_safety/inFO07009.pdf), but did not find anything in part 91.

It's probably not advisable as I imagine it would very likely be considered under 14 CFR 91.13 (careless and reckless operation). 

[Ibra]

That's similar to European rules (lights are required for CAT airlines operation but not for NCO private operation)

I am not sure which rule was violated? 

If it's something along FAR91.13 (or SERA.3101 here), then it's fine

[N201MKTurbo]

VFR departures from uncontrolled fields at night are the same as VFR departures during the day AFAIK. Except class G vis goes from 1 mile to 3 miles. If the vis is that low I’m not flying VFR day or night. 
 

When I first started flying, I was flying almost every day for work. I would often be flying at night. All done VFR. (I didn’t have an instrument rating at the time). I have taken off and landed at airports without lights. (Not for decades BTW)

[Ibra]

2 hours ago, N201MKTurbo said:

VFR departures from uncontrolled fields at night are the same as VFR departures during the day AFAIK. Except class G vis goes from 1 mile to 3 miles. If the vis is that low I’m not flying VFR day or night. 

Thanks for the confirmation,

AFAIK, it used to be the same rules here for night VFR: no difference except higher weather minima, 5km visibility, and higher obstacles clearance in cruise, I did my training under older rules. After 2012, the designations “Night VFR approved” and “Day VFR only” were introduced for airports.

I assumed these do not affect night IFR takeoff which in my case was nothing extraordinary: plenty of “day light” even with night (here it’s sunset +30min). I did not even notice it was night: I had CTOT (sort of delay/release) on my flight plan, I called sector ATC by phone for clearance, he asked if it’s public transport flight? told me airport is closed but he will need to check, later come back and gave clearance to depart. 

 

 

Edited Sunday at 12:42 AM by Ibra

[Hank]

When departing from an uncontrolled fields here, even in IMC, all that ATC can do is give a heading to enter controlled airspace (Class G usually starts at 700-1000 agl; below that is uncontrolled airspace if not designated as something else).

[Ibra]

48 minutes ago, Hank said:

Class G usually starts at 700-1000 agl; below that is uncontrolled airspace if not designated as something else

I guess it’s Echo that starts at 700-1000agl? It’s the same here, uncontrolled takeoff in Golf then join airspace above (usually, runway heading to 3000ft but sometimes THR assign SID/OMNI to some RNAV fixes).

I guess the runway having light or not won’t change anything to the clearance delivery for takeoff? (or say an approach for landing?)

 

 

Edited Sunday at 01:48 AM by Ibra

[Hank]

18 minutes ago, Ibra said:

I guess the runway having light or not won’t change anything to the clearance delivery for takeoff? (or say an approach for landing?)

Runway lights probably won't matter to Departure.

I've landed without a landing light at night, and landed once at a runway whose lights were burned out on one side (I had called that afternoon, they verified the lights worked; when I approached, there was one line of lights, so I guessed it was on the left side and came in to land--so of course the lights were on the right. Landed on my second try.)

[GeeBee]

There is no requirement for runway lights for IFR departure for a flight operated under Part 91. Part 121 and 135 required at night and daytime depends on visibility.

[BravoWhiskey]

I would just check the A/FD and see if it says “no ngt opps”  in the remarks.  

[midlifeflyer]

There are no general part 91 rules requiring airport lighting of any kind for departures. 

There may be takeoff minimums requiring lighting at a specific airports and there may be requirement for certain operators, but not plain vanilla Part 91.

 

[Ibra]

Thank you all for info/confirmation.

[Hank]

8 hours ago, midlifeflyer said:

There are no general part 91 rules requiring airport lighting of any kind for departures.

That makes sense, that's how we van depart with 0-0 visibility like we all practiced and demonstrated on our IFR checkrides.

Having landed without lights before, I'd make a no-runway-light departure,  but will save my next 0-0 departure for my next IFR checkride or approaching severe natural disaster.

[MattCW]

A few weeks ago I took off from an airport in a deep valley with no lights. It was basically the only time I paid close attention to the NOTAMs for "unlit towers." The landing light was more than sufficient to navigate the apron and taxiways. By the time I didn't care about the runway anymore, I was airborne and thinking more about towers and terrain than lights.

[bigmo]

Is this hypothetical, academic, or practical? As mentioned, no requirement at all.

I know 91 can take off with 0/0, but I also have had to turn back to the departure airport for a landing more than once. I try to keep that in mind when sussing out departure mins. Can I LAND here if I need to. Same logic goes for landing lights (at least to me). I've landed a few times with no landing light, but good edge lighting...sporty but doable. I've also had the light timer go off at about 100 AGL and you'd surprised how dark it gets fast. I'd not want to make a habit of that for sure.

I wouldn't say I'm overly cautious, but I tend to have personal mins for departure that match my landing mins.

[midlifeflyer]

12 hours ago, Hank said:

That makes sense, that's how we van depart with 0-0 visibility like we all practiced and demonstrated on our IFR checkrides.

We did? 

[midlifeflyer]

9 hours ago, bigmo said:

I wouldn't say I'm overly cautious, but I tend to have personal mins for departure that match my landing mins.

Many have personal departure mins higher than their approach mins. 

[Hank]

33 minutes ago, midlifeflyer said:

Many have personal departure mins higher than their approach mins. 

I don't like to take off if I can't come back in to land if need be. I also don't plan to shoot approaches to minimums, but the weather is what you get, not what is forecast. Like my trip last fall, where the forecast at home was scattered Cirrus, but on arrival was 400 overcast with 2 miles in mist . . . . 

It makes me uncomfortable when ATC asks, "what are your intentions?"

[midlifeflyer]

2 hours ago, Hank said:

I don't like to take off if I can't come back in to land if need be. I also don't plan to shoot approaches to minimums, but the weather is what you get, not what is forecast. Like my trip last fall, where the forecast at home was scattered Cirrus, but on arrival was 400 overcast with 2 miles in mist . . . . 

It makes me uncomfortable when ATC asks, "what are your intentions?"

Me too. 

I try to always know what my alternatives are*. Fortunately, with ADS-B or XM weather, there should be very few surprises. And I will happily head somewhere else rather than exceed my personal minimums. From that standpoint, approach conditions below personal minimums is no different than a thunderstorm sitting over the airport at arrival time. 

(* That means more than filed alternate, which is worst-case scenario planning and pretty much irrelevant in flight.)

[Fly Boomer]

3 hours ago, Hank said:

It makes me uncomfortable when ATC asks, "what are your intentions?"

I have heard that question.  

[Hank]

1 hour ago, Fly Boomer said:

I have heard that question.  

Yeah, so I diverted one county over where it was 900 overcast, visibility unlimited. Much easier landing after 4 hours' flying. 

[Yetti]

It used to be that on a commercial flight the plane had flares and a launcher I think they were required.   My friend was going through a Bonanza that still had the wiring for the flare launcher.     

[Fly Boomer]

14 minutes ago, Yetti said:

It used to be that on a commercial flight the plane had flares and a launcher I think they were required.   My friend was going through a Bonanza that still had the wiring for the flare launcher.     

Quite a few Cessna 195s have them (or the remnants).

 

[EricJ]

46 minutes ago, Fly Boomer said:

Quite a few Cessna 195s have them (or the remnants).

 

The flying club I worked for had a 1959 C182 that had three flares in the side of the fuselage just aft of the cabin.   I was always skeptical as to their utility.

[GeeBee]

You can always fire off the red one to let them know you have wounded on board.