Yes,
In the larger context of a recent thread, where the use of the airpseed indicator would seem to be a vital element of a sucessful landing, even in the most favourable flying conditions, It seemed somehow ironinc that I, the trouble maker who first suggested that a successful landing could be predicted and accomplished with cues other than the airspeed indicator, should be placed in the situation where I nearly had to prove it.
Yes, I could have diverted to another airport, where all kinds of assistance and visual cues would make a landing with a darkened instrument panel (and still serviceable, but also dark airspeed indicator) easy, but an extra half hour of night flying, into busier airspace with no nav lights, with only a portable radio, and no other electricity, seemed needlessly risky, mostly for all of the other aircraft who would be around me!
I have been jested for carrying too much extra equipment in my modest airplane, but you never seem to have the system failures when everything is going well, they always wait for it to be just a little more inconvenient, or you to be a little less prepared, before quitting. So I was prepared, and it made the difference! I got where I was going safely.
We are all duty bound to not only be prepared for the flight, but for the additional things which reasonably could happen during the flight. I completely agree that a part of that preparation, would be to be ready to land at night after a complete electrical failure. After decades of being prepared, I had to do it! No big deal!
Pilot DAR